The black market argument shows the reality of a ban on guns. If you are talking about gun control in reality, this has to be addressed. If we're talking about a hypothetical world that truly and effectively bans guns (or just certain guns), that is a different scenario altogether.
the reality is that a ban on certain guns and tougher laws to obtain others may prevent some people from getting them, who potential might commit a crime with them. Thus preventing a certain amount(%) of certain crimes(murder, armed robbery, etc.) to happen.
this may take a long time to happen. IMO, probably a generation.
You wanna know the criteria for a weapong being deemed an assault weapon?
if it has a bayonette (sp? sorry, that's bad) lug
it has a folding stock
it has a pistol grip
a big magazine
I know you are not a lefty jlew, but seriously, I think the left has you hook line and sinker on this issue. it's style over substance. the term "assault weapon", i'm guessing most people associate with machine guns. With an "assault weapon" you pull the trigger, and one bullet comes out. with a machine gun (which are illegal but I think they should be legal) you press the trigger once, and lots of bullets come out.
As with any issue, when people become informed, I think they favor the conservative side...learn about guns, and you will become enlightened my friend
your right, I am by no means an expert on guns. I couldnt properly classify a assault gun to a water pistol but I dont really care.
All guns are designed to kill whats in front of them. my friend farfrom will tell you, "with no bullets in it, the gun cant kill, thus not designed to kill."
well I found out all guns for bullet chambers, a trigger, and some sort of firing mechanism.
I have no idea where to draw the line from an "ok" gun to a assault gun...
but I would like to see a line. One side of the line is a ban the other makes it very difficult to get......
so you, miller, and farfrom can play the "shoot the apple off my head game."
$3,000 of the most firepower the average Joe can buy without major hassle from the BATFE. Yes, it is the big scarry 50 caliber that all the hippies want banned. Gues how many have been used to commit a crime...
Zero.
But they still want to ban it! Even more reason to want to buy one.
Add that to my semi-auto Kalashnikov, semi-auto Kalashnikov 12 Gauge Shotgun, and AR-15, and I am Diane Feinstein's worst nightmare
What good are your rights without the right to protect them?
$3,000 of the most firepower the average Joe can buy without major hassle from the BATFE. Yes, it is the big scarry 50 caliber that all the hippies want banned. Gues how many have been used to commit a crime...
Zero.
But they still want to ban it! Even more reason to want to buy one.
Add that to my semi-auto Kalashnikov, semi-auto Kalashnikov 12 Gauge Shotgun, and AR-15, and I am Diane Feinstein's worst nightmare
What good are your rights without the right to protect them?
Cool. I'm thinking you have more reasons to possess a firearm like that other than the fact that there are those who would rather you didn't. The thing is, a .22 can do as much killing as the next gun, if killing is the aim.
$3,000 of the most firepower the average Joe can buy without major hassle from the BATFE. Yes, it is the big scarry 50 caliber that all the hippies want banned. Gues how many have been used to commit a crime...
Zero.
But they still want to ban it! Even more reason to want to buy one.
Add that to my semi-auto Kalashnikov, semi-auto Kalashnikov 12 Gauge Shotgun, and AR-15, and I am Diane Feinstein's worst nightmare
What good are your rights without the right to protect them?
Why do you want to own those weapons? I'm just curious. What's the point of having them?
It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!
.22 can do as much killing as the next gun, if killing is the aim.
Actually it can't. Its much easier to kill something with a high-powered rifle than with a .22
It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!
Actually it can't. Its much easier to kill something with a high-powered rifle than with a .22
Not if you're an expert shot. As 69Charger said, it may not pack the wallop at a greater distance, however, if it a well-placed shot by an expert rifleman, it will do the job.
Oh, and because there are those out there who dispise these weapons.
To quote Ed... "Fuck 'em"!
Ok, fair enough. But do you reckon any Joe should be allowed to own one, or do you think that you should be throuroughly background checked, psych tested, trained etc before you're allowed to buy one.
(Sorry if you've covered this already, I came in late)
It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!
Ok, fair enough. But do you reckon any Joe should be allowed to own one, or do you think that you should be throuroughly background checked, psych tested, trained etc before you're allowed to buy one.
(Sorry if you've covered this already, I came in late)
I think background checks are fair. The rest is all about personal responsibility.
"With great power comes great responsibility."
I am for extremely harsh penalites for crimes comitted with firearms with the exception of self-defense related liabilities.
Not if you're an expert shot. As 69Charger said, it may not pack the wallop at a greater distance, however, if it a well-placed shot by an expert rifleman, it will do the job.
Ok, but the point is that some firearms really are more dangerous (and therefore more worthy of tighter controls) than others.
It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!
There's no way you can convince me that a .22 is as dangerous as a high powered rifle. I know from experience that it isn't.
It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!
If you hit me on the butt with a .22 I will not die. If I hit you in the butt with my 50 Cal you will be torn apart. Literally.
LOL. You didn't Google it, you shit. I was hoping you did. LOL. Cuz I know I'm right. If my memory serves, a .22 leaves the barrel at around 1800 feet per second. A Colt .45 automatic (which was used through the '80's in our military) leaves the barrel at a sluggish 950 feet per second. The bullets are remarkably different in size, and hence, the damage they can inflict. A .45 would really mess somebody up at close range, and that's what they were designed for.
Ok, at the risk of sounding like a redneck . . . . I have shot plenty of rabbits and kangaroos with a .22 with the aim to kill them. They often don't die. Trying to kill a wild pig with a .22 is like trying to knock down a brick wall with a pair of slippers.
Some firearms are more dangerous than others. That is a fact. That's why when the gun laws were reformed in Australia certain types of firearms were placed under tighter controls than others.
It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!
LOL. You didn't Google it, you shit. I was hoping you did. LOL. Cuz I know I'm right. If my memory serves, a .22 leaves the barrel at around 1800 feet per second. A Colt .45 automatic (which was used through the '80's in our military) leaves the barrel at a sluggish 950 feet per second. The bullets are remarkably different in size, and hence, the damage they can inflict. A .45 would really mess somebody up at close range, and that's what they were designed for.
You aren't.
First you are comparing a rifle round (.22) to a pistol round (.45).
Secondly the fastest .22 will leave the barrel around 1800fps, most around 1,300. The .204 Ruger has a muzzle velocity over 4,000fps. The .223 or 5.56 Nato leaves the barrel at 2,700fps.
The .22 has a fairly average muzzle velocity, very low bullet weight, and is, for all intents and purposes, ineffective past 200 yards.
First you are comparing a rifle round (.22) to a pistol round (.45).
Secondly the fastest .22 will leave the barrel around 1800fps, most around 1,300. The .204 Ruger has a muzzle velocity over 4,000fps. The .223 or 5.56 Nato leaves the barrel at 2,700fps.
The .22 has a fairly average muzzle velocity, very low bullet weight, and is, for all intents and purposes, ineffective past 200 yards.
personally I hate guns. They are intended for one purpose. To Kill. I would like to see extremely tough gun laws. much tougher then the ones already in place. and an all out ban on assault weapons like machine guns.
the second amendment right is as outdated as catholic priests not being allowed to marry. we shouldnt have the right to bear arms. it should be a privilege to those who qualify.
what a joke. the cities with the strictest gun laws have the highest crime rates. the states with concieled weapon permits have the lowest crime rates. there has not been a crime comitted with a legally registered machine gun since 1934.
did you ever consider that crimes are comitted by those who do not respect the law and therefore wouldn't abide by any gun laws?
Ok, at the risk of sounding like a redneck . . . . I have shot plenty of rabbits and kangaroos with a .22 with the aim to kill them. They often don't die. Trying to kill a wild pig with a .22 is like trying to knock down a brick wall with a pair of slippers.
Some firearms are more dangerous than others. That is a fact. That's why when the gun laws were reformed in Australia certain types of firearms were placed under tighter controls than others.
remember 44 minutes where 2 bank robbers fired thousands of rounds from automatic AK-47's and nobody got killed? what about police shoot-outs you see on the news where let's say 50 shots were fired at close range by highly trained police and nobody gets hit?
those who don't know anything about guns think they are some majical weapon. the truth is; a gun is the least deadliest of all the known weapons.
if i had a gun and someone robbed me, i might use it. if there were no guns and someone robbed me, i could potentially defend myself with brutal but not lethal force. there would be a lot less robberies too. that would be cool, but guns are here to stay. what is the point in not having one? is it wrong to feel insecure without one?
if someone is denied the ability to have a gun legally, they will get one illegally. it is pretty much a lost cause.
you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
~Ron Burgundy
what a joke. the cities with the strictest gun laws have the highest crime rates. the states with concieled weapon permits have the lowest crime rates.
Comments
the reality is that a ban on certain guns and tougher laws to obtain others may prevent some people from getting them, who potential might commit a crime with them. Thus preventing a certain amount(%) of certain crimes(murder, armed robbery, etc.) to happen.
this may take a long time to happen. IMO, probably a generation.
call me crazy but thats my theory
how picky are you going to get.
how about this, guns similar too machine guns. fuck
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon
your right, I am by no means an expert on guns. I couldnt properly classify a assault gun to a water pistol but I dont really care.
All guns are designed to kill whats in front of them. my friend farfrom will tell you, "with no bullets in it, the gun cant kill, thus not designed to kill."
well I found out all guns for bullet chambers, a trigger, and some sort of firing mechanism.
I have no idea where to draw the line from an "ok" gun to a assault gun...
but I would like to see a line. One side of the line is a ban the other makes it very difficult to get......
so you, miller, and farfrom can play the "shoot the apple off my head game."
http://www.armalite.com/sales/catalog/rifles/ar50.htm
http://www.gunblast.com/images/SHOT2006/Day2/DSC07956.jpg
$3,000 of the most firepower the average Joe can buy without major hassle from the BATFE. Yes, it is the big scarry 50 caliber that all the hippies want banned. Gues how many have been used to commit a crime...
Zero.
But they still want to ban it! Even more reason to want to buy one.
Add that to my semi-auto Kalashnikov, semi-auto Kalashnikov 12 Gauge Shotgun, and AR-15, and I am Diane Feinstein's worst nightmare
What good are your rights without the right to protect them?
Cool. I'm thinking you have more reasons to possess a firearm like that other than the fact that there are those who would rather you didn't. The thing is, a .22 can do as much killing as the next gun, if killing is the aim.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Why do you want to own those weapons? I'm just curious. What's the point of having them?
-C Addison
This is actually one of the major reasons I collect the guns that I collect.
Sure, just not from 2,500+ yards away through armor plating
[BORAT]High Five![/BORAT]
Same reason someone owns a Dodge Viper.
It's obnoxiously powerful and fun as hell to use.
Oh, and because there are those out there who dispise these weapons.
To quote Ed... "Fuck 'em"!
Hehee. You're a good gun Consumer. I'll give you that.
*thinking of ways to get a job with the carlisle group*
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Actually it can't. Its much easier to kill something with a high-powered rifle than with a .22
-C Addison
Not if you're an expert shot. As 69Charger said, it may not pack the wallop at a greater distance, however, if it a well-placed shot by an expert rifleman, it will do the job.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Ok, fair enough. But do you reckon any Joe should be allowed to own one, or do you think that you should be throuroughly background checked, psych tested, trained etc before you're allowed to buy one.
(Sorry if you've covered this already, I came in late)
-C Addison
A .22 has one of the highest feet/per second velocity of any firearm on the planet.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I think background checks are fair. The rest is all about personal responsibility.
"With great power comes great responsibility."
I am for extremely harsh penalites for crimes comitted with firearms with the exception of self-defense related liabilities.
Ok, but the point is that some firearms really are more dangerous (and therefore more worthy of tighter controls) than others.
-C Addison
No it doesn't. Not by (pardon the pun) a long shot.
Sure it does, look it up. My guess is that it's in the top 20, and it will be surrounded by a lot of military-grade arms.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
There's no way you can convince me that a .22 is as dangerous as a high powered rifle. I know from experience that it isn't.
-C Addison
You're gonna be really disappointed. Are you sure you still want me to? Cause I will if you really want me to.
If the aim is to kill, it can be, simple as that.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
If you hit me on the butt with a .22 I will not die. If I hit you in the butt with my 50 Cal you will be torn apart. Literally.
LOL. You didn't Google it, you shit. I was hoping you did. LOL. Cuz I know I'm right. If my memory serves, a .22 leaves the barrel at around 1800 feet per second. A Colt .45 automatic (which was used through the '80's in our military) leaves the barrel at a sluggish 950 feet per second. The bullets are remarkably different in size, and hence, the damage they can inflict. A .45 would really mess somebody up at close range, and that's what they were designed for.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Ok, at the risk of sounding like a redneck . . . . I have shot plenty of rabbits and kangaroos with a .22 with the aim to kill them. They often don't die. Trying to kill a wild pig with a .22 is like trying to knock down a brick wall with a pair of slippers.
Some firearms are more dangerous than others. That is a fact. That's why when the gun laws were reformed in Australia certain types of firearms were placed under tighter controls than others.
-C Addison
I think I did it ages ago (but can't be bothered to check!).
You aren't.
First you are comparing a rifle round (.22) to a pistol round (.45).
Secondly the fastest .22 will leave the barrel around 1800fps, most around 1,300. The .204 Ruger has a muzzle velocity over 4,000fps. The .223 or 5.56 Nato leaves the barrel at 2,700fps.
The .22 has a fairly average muzzle velocity, very low bullet weight, and is, for all intents and purposes, ineffective past 200 yards.
You take your .22 and I'll keep my .50
I call time out. LOL.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
what a joke. the cities with the strictest gun laws have the highest crime rates. the states with concieled weapon permits have the lowest crime rates. there has not been a crime comitted with a legally registered machine gun since 1934.
did you ever consider that crimes are comitted by those who do not respect the law and therefore wouldn't abide by any gun laws?
remember 44 minutes where 2 bank robbers fired thousands of rounds from automatic AK-47's and nobody got killed? what about police shoot-outs you see on the news where let's say 50 shots were fired at close range by highly trained police and nobody gets hit?
those who don't know anything about guns think they are some majical weapon. the truth is; a gun is the least deadliest of all the known weapons.
Wow. I'm as anti-gun control as anyone, but how'd you come up with this?
There's a reason the police and the military no longer carry boards with nails in them.
if someone is denied the ability to have a gun legally, they will get one illegally. it is pretty much a lost cause.
~Ron Burgundy
would love to see some stats.
good news
such a vague statement. crimes are very often committed by people who have always respected the law.
how about the guy who went on a rampage in the Amish school? he had a very clean record.