JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

Forums

1/18/2013 1:50:59 AM
4
http://youtu.be/JDglpt8hpyg?t=2m http://youtu.be/8C-CLsMRcA0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgDYBORYtaI http://youtu.be/lXh02wPJuDY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ic7TE9IsOQ http://youtu.be/k8zIG_KRRMU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kt0U2cO9e0 why are people with absolutely no actual knowledge of a subject trying to ban something from law abiding people, and ignoring all fact and statistics? it's even presented in condensed video form for simpletons. and LOL AP. that means[b] any rifle round[/b]; heavy handgun rounds, hunting rounds etc. any modern ammo except .22LR, pretty much. do some research on the different levels of bullet resistant material.police are using level 2A...it's pretty much only made for slowing down small caliber things so they're not as lethal. and pistol rounds are all anemic anyways.
English

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • oh look, ignored again. way to present yourselves as logical/rational, if you don't want to deal with facts and dismiss them as propaganda. how about instead of "gun lobby redneck detected ignore, ignore!ignore!", try to self-educate on the issue, try to observe facts , and try to have a rational discussion like a civilized human?

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • But I am not discussing that. I am discussing the excuse used for owning it. We could as easily be talking about flamethrowers or nukes. Whether or not AP rounds and AR's are dangerous or not, the government has decided to reinstate a ban on them. An excuse given for not doing the ban is that these would be used to fight a tyrannical US government. Why is this an excuse if the US is a stable, peaceful, democratically based nation?

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Is there a difference between an AR-15 and a Rueger .223 semi auto? Nope. Except one looks "evil" and "scary". They function the same way but look different. How is there a problem with the reliable AR-15 and not the Rueger .223? Same round, same ROF, same muzzle velocity, same bullet energy. So should we ban semi-auto varmint rifles? And the .223 round isn't crap compared to a .308 or a 30-06. So should we ban M1 Garands? Technically, according to mass media and uninformed people, a M1 Garand is an assault weapon. It was used in mass for US forces in WWII. Or how about the Lee Enfield or Karbiner 98? Those were considered assualt weapons in their day. Why not now? "Well more powerful weapons came out." True but however these are still classified as assault weapons. Hell the Henry Repeating rifle was an assault weapon. Apparently the media says that even a semi-auto rifle is an assault weapon/rifle. An assault rifle my dear boy is a selective fire capable weapon. It has nothing to do with magazine size, appearance, or ease of use. An assault weapon is a rifle designed for military use. Is a Rueger .223 used for military? As with many other weapons? They say they wanna put a ban on all semi-auto weapons. That includes shotguns, rifles and handguns. Simply put, that would be a travesty. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for mental health checks, background checks and regular checkups on owners. However registering all guns, banning STANDARD CAPACITY(30 rounds) mags, and having red flags on people who buy "massive amounts" of ammo is incredibly ridiculous. It makes no sense to do that to someone. Maybe they want to stock up on ammo for a trip to the range? Why is it the governments business? Does it matter how many I have? Why should the government know? They have guns, rounds, forces. If they have it, so should the common American. (Of course with proper screening first. I know a ton of rednecks whom I wouldn't trust with a gun if you looked at them the wrong way.) And for the love of god stop bringing up the damn "flamethrower or nuclear weapon" argument. FFS be sensible. I hate when anti-gun's bring up that argument. It's completely invalid. Those aren't firearms. Is a nuclear weapon a firearm? Is a flamethrower? Those were never meant for civilian use. So bringing them up in a debate over civilian gun rights is illogical. Everyone knows damn well that a civilian should never and WILL NEVER get their hands on one of those legally and appropriately. That argument has been debunked since it began. And also, fully-automatic rifles aren't meant for civilian use therefore they shouldn't be allowed to be owned. That's something I agree with. I see both sides however the lefter side of the argument is too hell-bent on banning firearms left and right. While the right wants people to have access without checks or balances. I'm sorry no. Feel free to to criticize my opinion. It happens in this argument.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Edited by OaklandPaintbalr: 1/18/2013 2:25:51 AM
    [quote]Why is this an excuse if the US is a stable, peaceful, democratically based nation?[/quote] Because this might not be so in the future. The future is uncertain. We don't even know if the world will still be habitable in 10 years, perhaps due to some horrific nuclear exchange. We also don't know that the USA will be a stable, peaceful, democratically based nation in 10 years.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

You are not allowed to view this content.
;
preload icon
preload icon
preload icon