The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Have yet to hear a single valid argument for assault rifle ownership
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:42 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580132) |
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:46 PM Author: turquoise razzmatazz den cuckoldry 5 masked youths break into your house at midnight. You’re not taking them all down with a handgun unless you’re James Bond. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580158) |
 |
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:53 PM Author: trip yarmulke range pfft. James Bond isn't taking down shit with that PPK pee-shooter. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581267) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 10:43 PM Author: Fragrant fishy nowag An assault rifle is no more lethal than a semiautomatic pistol in a home invasion situation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34584142) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2017 1:11 AM Author: Lascivious parlor athletic conference I shoot both regularly. Believe me I can do more damage with my short barrel AR 15 with a 30 round magazine. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34585428) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:46 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Before I engage you further please identify what you consider to be an assault rifle?
Please do more than just say "AR-15". Explain which components or features of the rifle you feel make it an assault rifle and should be banned. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:47 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assault_rifles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580173) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:52 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit By that definition assault rifles are not legal to be owned by citizens. Try again buddy.
What makes a rifle an assault rifle in your opinion? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:55 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapons_legislation_in_the_United_States (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580247) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:57 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit The definition varies from state to state. Please identify specifically what you consider an assault rifle without simply posting a link. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580272) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:59 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon I appreciate the subtlety.
Okay, let me say this:
The only guns that should be legal for citizens:
handguns, shotguns, and little 22s.
Have never heard an argument for anything more. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:38 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Ok now we are getting somewhere.
I guess you want to ban most hunting and target shooting?
Any centerfire rifle regardless of capacity or rate of fire should be banned? Despite legitimate purposes? Yet pistons, which are primarily designed for the killing of human beings, should be allowed?
What about a .22 in a AR-15 set up? That should be legal while a three round 30-06 should be banned? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:45 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon what is most common gun for hunting purposes? I'll allow that one too. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:47 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit There is no such thing but probably the .223, which is what is used in the AR-15 but is completely inadequate for anything larger than a white tail deer and usually inappropriate for anything larger than a coyote. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580771) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:53 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon Too bad. That's all your getting. If you can't bring a deer down with that then it's on you. Get better. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580829) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:57 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Actually a bunch of dudes from the late 1700s say different. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580861) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:52 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon if you cant bring a deer down with a blackpowder blunderbuss then get better. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581780) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:14 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Ah. He old liberal resort to the "guns at the time of the founding fathers" argument. Tell me, using that same interpretation where does that leave gay marriage, blacks, women, and other non property owning white males?0 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581975) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:18 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon "gay marriage, blacks, women, and other non property owning white males" You mean in an Amendment? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:22 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Gay marriage is not included in an amendment. The civil rights act d looting rights act are statutory, not constitutional.
Face it shitib, guns ain't going anywhere. Your best shot was to win in 2016 but you bungled that by running Hillary. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:26 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon what rights act? Looting rights act?
But as to your first paragraph, you realize you made my point for me, right?
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:27 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Typo on my pos phone. Voting rights act. Funny typo though. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582064) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:30 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon I would normally enjoy it except I'm not in a super race realist mood at the moment. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582087) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:31 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Bookmark it and revisit later. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582094) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:42 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube Turrable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580719) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:58 PM Author: vengeful drunken degenerate you've NEVER heard an "argument" for guns other than handguns, shotguns, and 22s? lol wtf shitlib east coast "men" are hysterical (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580871) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:27 PM Author: sienna mind-boggling stead you're talking to a man with an inverted penis (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581041) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 7:22 PM Author: Zombie-like indigo house dragon (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582457) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:36 PM Author: Effete sandwich Rofl so no deer hunting rifles? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581107) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:43 PM Author: talented trump supporter I'll work with this.
Why make easily concealable handguns legal but not large caliber semi-auto rifles? Why make easily silenceable .22s legal since they're only good for target practice, mischief, and assassination? No handgun caliber restrictions for handguns? What about semi-auto shotguns? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:53 PM Author: talented trump supporter (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581261) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:52 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon Because it makes mass shootings incrementally more difficult, that's why. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581790) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:01 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit What? Banning large and difficult to manage rifles instead of small easily concealable handguns makes mass shootings more difficult? Gun issues aside, think about the logic of that statement.. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581848) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:12 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon Yes.
Which gets more shots fired in mass shootings. Small handguns or rifles? Any data on this?
We all know small handguns aren't going anywhere. We've got to try to accommodate the 2nd amendment after all. And between the two which is more likely to be used for mass shootings? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:16 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Handguns.
Handguns can carry a similar quantity of ammo, the magazines and ammo are lighter, cheaper and easier to conceal and have been used in far more shootings. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:16 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon MASS shootings? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581997) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:24 PM Author: arousing prole shrine not even close. by the shitlib definition any shooting with over 4 victims is a mass shooting.
even if you only count public random mass shootings, handguns still overwhelmingly dominate.
if you only count public mass shootings from long distances outdoors, then rifles probably dominate, but there have only been two of those shootings in the past 30 years and the DC sniper shootings are more spree shootings than mass shootings. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:28 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon This appears accurate. See below.
TBF, I think gun companies went nuts over ramping up handguns because they are after all "handguns" and non gun owners think of revolvers or little pea shooters when they think of "handguns"--as I just did. Why not just do a revolver type of gun, a 22, a shotgun, and something for hunting? Why do we need anything else, at all, ever? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 10:53 PM Author: Fragrant fishy nowag So you basically agree that you have no idea what you are talking about? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34584215) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:25 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Define mass shooting, preferably without simply posting a link with no explanation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582050) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:25 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon Looks like you are right on this point.
Handguns are what seem to be used the most in mass shootings. Evidently handguns carry a lot of power on their own.
Okay then, why not get rid of them altogether and just knock things down to revolvers, 22s, shotguns, and something for hunting? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:28 PM Author: arousing prole shrine go run on that platform. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582070) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:28 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Instead why don't we step back to reality and keep everything we've got. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582074) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:29 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon Reality is mass shooting. and gun manufacturers running amuck. There should be some way to cut back on the hazard while still preserving the 2nd amendment. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:32 PM Author: arousing prole shrine mass shootings are trivial. You are not preserving the second amendment if you limit weapons to those that are incapable of shooting people who are not limited by laws. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582102) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:35 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon trivial? As to your second sentence, I cant even ... if anything additional were made illegal to own or possess, coupled with buyback programs (which we know from Australia work) --this is just sort of a silly cartoon world type of thing to say. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:42 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit A mandatory buy back? So you are advocating confiscation of firearms from legal owners? The brothas who own illegally just get to keep theirs? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582187) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:42 PM Author: arousing prole shrine they werent confiscating 100 million semi automatic guns in Austrailia. Also there is no right to private gun ownership in Australia.
The number of people killed in mass shootings where "assault weapons" are a meaningful factor is trivial compared to the number of legal plastic rifles shot recreationally and safely. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:32 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Make guns cheaper so the victims can shoot back. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582109) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2017 1:23 AM Author: talented trump supporter *mows down your entire census district with my automatic shotguns and duffel full of 30rd mags & glocks* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34585475) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2017 1:35 AM Author: Boyish mahogany ratface i wrote a response but i chose to delete it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34585505) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:58 PM Author: umber hairraiser scourge upon the earth boistinker The problem is that the "assault weapons ban" tries to make certain cosmetic features of a rifle illegal and really doesn't speak at all to how they actually fire cartridges. So you can have two rifles that function identically and one is perfectly legal while the other is not. It's a dumb way to think about things. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580279) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:02 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit This is what I'm getting at. A semi automatic action is a semi automatic action regardless of its cosmetic features. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580319) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:24 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube The entire gun control/ assault rife ban shtick is an intentional effort to confuse people between automatic weapons and semiautomatic weapons. It's intentional, libs have been doing it for decades, and it has never really worked.
EDIT: when a lib says "I don't see why people need to own assault weapons," they mean "I don't think that people need to own guns." |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:59 PM Author: Effete sandwich They should focus on AR style vs bolt action (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581325) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:04 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube I hate how dishonest libs are on this issue. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581354) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:33 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon TBF, I think the NRA muddies the water just as much if not more.
lol at "Handgun" and the confusion I myself have demonstrated. Handguns can be powerful as fuck, but typical gun-ignorant people like myself think "handgun"--that's just a small thing you use for personal safety and its only got a few bullets in it and its like a revolver. When in reality a handgun can be a fucking Monster. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:43 PM Author: arousing prole shrine gun ignorant people should avoid the gun policy debate until they are less ignorant. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582194) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:44 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582206) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:24 PM Author: flatulent jewess this is why legislation should contemplate ammunition and technical modifications related to firing. it's easy enough to define some terms. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581028) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:59 PM Author: Mewling partner assault weapon =/= assault rifle
under some definitions, a 10/22 is an assault weapon. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 11:07 PM Author: Fragrant fishy nowag Yeah if a 10/22 has a scary black stock. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34584328) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:48 PM Author: pink soul-stirring business firm Feels powerful like BigCock. You wouldn't beleive but shoots better LOADS, my friend tells me (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580176) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 2:55 PM Author: umber hairraiser scourge upon the earth boistinker an AR-15 is not an assault rifle. is that really what you're getting at? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580253) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:01 PM Author: amber appetizing half-breed elastic band why is that the weapon of choice used in mass killings? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580309) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:08 PM Author: umber hairraiser scourge upon the earth boistinker is it, shitlib? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580396) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:25 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube vat (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580532) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2017 6:10 AM Author: talented trump supporter (columbine masterman) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34586000) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:00 PM Author: swashbuckling jet station french chef As the poaster above stated, rapid firing on a pack of buckwild youths intent on raping your wife/daughter (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580295) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:00 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon (guy who lives in Idaho) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580299) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:01 PM Author: swashbuckling jet station french chef Not sure what that has to do with it, racist (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580311) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:02 PM Author: umber hairraiser scourge upon the earth boistinker they're also great for hunting wild boar (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580320) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:28 PM Author: sienna mind-boggling stead aka feral hogs (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581052) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:01 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube Sure, if you can tell me what an assault rifle is. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580312) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:03 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&mc=19&forum_id=2#34580173 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580337) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:18 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube So, scary looking guns. Got it.
So I can own a wood colored gun semi-auto rifle that shoots 8 millimeter rounds that can accommodate a detachable cartridge, but make it black and it's illegal. Got it. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:10 PM Author: Metal stubborn school Because the terrists will just use cars instead (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580420) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:43 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Primary argument in favor: THE SECOND AMENDMENT (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580735) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:55 PM Author: laughsome self-centered boiling water (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580851) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:28 PM Author: wine crackhouse internal respiration (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581043) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 3:56 PM Author: Filthy Glittery Location So we can shoot people like you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34580853) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:22 PM Author: flatulent jewess many people in favor or no assault weapon ban make a couple of arguments but the mainstream ones usually approximate:
1) second amendment does not place limitations on 'arms' and that is absolute, and
2) socially justifiable to open these weapons because an armed militia of ordinary citizens is somehow fundamental to operation of our democracy
#1 is demonstrably false because obviously we already regulate ownership of arms within reason. if you have have this
http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/machinegun-m2491.jpg
then the government will come and take it away from you if you're discovered. you won't win that fight. we routinely and always have regulated certain types of 'machine guns.'
#2 is lulzy because the guys who think they're going to overthrow the government are inevitably fat sweaty little suburbanites like zimmerhero who wouldn't stand a chance against even half-assed national guardsmen in some kind of seditionist conflict. also explicitly contemplates traitorous armed rebellion against our government, LOL. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:24 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube hahaha what person who opposes an assault weapon ban/ whatever gun ban has ever - ever - used these points? this has to be flame.
EDIT: this is so fucking stupid. This has to be flame. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:26 PM Author: flatulent jewess I have seen both positions argued on XO and I hear them IRL plenty. comes down to AREW GUNS and 'this is what the founders wanted!' (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581033) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:31 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube No you haven't. Nobody - nobody - thinks that the 2nd amendment protects your right to have an automatic weapon, hand grenade, howitzer, napalm bomb, etc. Maybe in your middle school class, pumo, but not here.
Also, you are correct, ownership of certain types of "machine guns" is regulated to the point to where they are basically banned: all of them. It's also totally illegal to have one made after '86 (or something like this).
Your second point is nonsensical, I'm not even 100% sure what you're trying to say. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:36 PM Author: flatulent jewess I agree that it's childish argument and I have also seen it argued with passion on XO. I hear it from dumbs IRL all the time as well. if you think there aren't hordes of people out there who will insist that it's actually their constitutional right to have a grenade launcher or a fully auto gun shooting russian-made hollow point ammo from a giant banana clip, then you're living in a bubble.
I agree with your second paragraph but gun control advocates want broader regulation or currently legal items. regulation for transactions, ownership, tracking, and yes the physical features and capabilities of the gun. if you think that's all legislatively insurmountable then you lack imagination.
as for #2, you don't know that many hardcore gun ownership advocates (I know you'll rage at my with all your bonafides anyway) if you have never heard anyone state that the ability to adequately arm yourself in order to resist the government is fundamental consideration of the 2nd amendment, then again, you're living in a bubble. doughy suburbanites and hicks aside, how do you explain the position of ruby ridge types? you really think a watered down version of the militia/rugged-individualst approach to the rationale for constitutionally protected gun ownership is not a popular sentiment among gun owners? LOL. guess we agree to disagree. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:38 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube 2nd point: a federal registry. No fucking way, not now, not ever. We all know how politics work and what that will lead to. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581115) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:44 PM Author: flatulent jewess and here comes the paranoid carping about taking ARE GUNS
it's a culture war thing to a large extent and everyone should just admit that. you guys like guns and think they're critical to the fabric of society and national character. you think we already have very good policies and adequate regulation, but also you just really like owning guns. shitlibs strongly disagree, surprise surprise. not that difficult but please don't act like the statement you just made is anything more than a goofy slippery slope. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:47 PM Author: arousing prole shrine so are you saying that you oppose the culture of gun ownership and the general right to private gun ownership?
I think that is typical and is the driving force piecemeal behind gun control proposals, but of course people don't admit it publicly. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:50 PM Author: flatulent jewess no I don't really care one way or another. gun ownership as a right is fine and I think arguments against the efficacy of many regulatory schemes are valid. none of that is incompatible with increased regulation. it should be established by right and then treated as a privilege. again, we regulate guns, and we can do it more within reason despite all the chicken little sobbing and kicking from people who are essentially defending this same 'culture of gun ownership' over any practical utility of gun ownership. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581237) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:56 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube Yes, the democratic party, if given the opportunity, will severely limit or outlaw private gun ownership. This is not slippery slope crackpot conspiracy stuff, dems put their cards on the table in their disappointment with the Heller decision.
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:04 PM Author: flatulent jewess and obama bitterly castigated congress for not regulating more after sandy hook. you guys extrapolate that every democrat is out to take away guns. our culture is obsessive about guns. our rates of gun ownership and gun violence and accidental gun deaths are through the fucking ceiling. we are unique in this regard. don't start screeching and grabbing your dick because dem politicians are willing to acknowledge this fact to the pleasure of their constituencies. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581355) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:07 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube So, dems want to confiscate guns. I know. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581375) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:10 PM Author: flatulent jewess you're histrionic on this point but little else. nobody is going to come take daddy's shotgun during your lifetime and if you start ranting about family and sportsmen's tradition then you know you're just howling at the moon. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581397) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:13 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube I understand that you don't want to do that. However, go read what's written on Huffpost, etc. on this issue. Yes, they do. Read what was written about Heller (i.e. 5/4 decision that a functional total handgun ban was unconstitutional). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581428) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:16 PM Author: flatulent jewess see: chicken little. idiots on huffpo and political pandering don't seriously justify policy positions in reaction to such. it's like libs demanding that we impeach trump yesterday over Russian collusion that probably doesn't exist. look at what's feasible and realistic over some Pelosi type fundraising machine throwing red meat to her base by talking about buybacks and bans. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581448) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:21 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube "idiots on huffpo and political pandering don't seriously justify policy positions in reaction to such" - agreed, but that's the way politics seems to work now. You're dealing with a political party that just went all-in over tranny-bathrooms.
HRC said she would appoint SCOTUS judges who would rule differently on Heller. Lib publications treated Heller like it was the Dred Scott decision. If Heller went 5/4, and HRC becomes president, do you really believe that there wouldn't be far reaching federal restrictions on gun ownership? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:32 PM Author: flatulent jewess I am arguing for increased federal restrictions, if you have forgotten. the level of chest-beating THE FEDS ARE COMING and level of paranoia that comes with gun ownership advocacy. you're couching your argument in this nightmare scenario where theoretical HRC presidency ----> imminent ban on private ownership of guns. that's so lulzy I don't even want to get into it and if you're offended by that, please consider what it would look like to sincerely make that pitch to a room full of fully informed and reasonable people. I don't care if you saw some clickbait from slate.com talking about how Heller was a dark day in American history. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581620) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:48 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube If sensible regulations would pacify the anti-gun crowd, they might be worth considering. Considering that virtually all gun violence is committed using handguns, whatever is in an assault weapon ban isn't going to affect anyone outside of a few gun enthusiasts (and have no effect on violent crime).
However, that's not the goal of the anti-gun crowd, sensible regulations are not going to end this debate, and these laws are just being pushed as an incremental measure to the ultimate goal, i.e. a functional ban on private gun ownership. Why can't you see that? This is what the left is saying, this isn't some sort of secret. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:50 PM Author: Effete sandwich (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581771) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:02 PM Author: flatulent jewess this is talk radio shit. if you're going to rehash the same PANIC EVERYBODY HILLARY VOTERS ARE GOING TO COME TAKE ARE GUNS argument every time and whine that I don't agree, then there isn't much point to the subthread. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581859) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:13 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon He gets like this on talk radio topics. It's really dumb. Like bash your head against the wall level dumb. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581966) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:16 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon And fuck you for badmouthing me in this thread, faggot. These are the bedfellows you've got--don't pull me in when the bedbugs bite. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581995) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:39 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base outted as dumb for Russian hollow point, ljl (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581132) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:43 PM Author: flatulent jewess http://www.sgammo.com/product/wolf-or-wpa/1000-round-case-762x39-hollow-point-123-grain-wpa-wolf-polyformance-ammo-made-ru
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:44 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base and those aren't exceptionally dangerous you moron (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581184) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:45 PM Author: arousing prole shrine dangerous to your gun if you dont clean it every 30 seconds, but that's about it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581195) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:46 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base New manufactured stuff is almost all non corrosive, as is the stuff in the link (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581201) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:47 PM Author: flatulent jewess they're going to potentially fuck you up worse in many cases and there's no great reason for average citizens to have them other than 'we can' but i understand why cops need them (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581205) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:49 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base You honestly don't know wtf you're talking about, a rifle with round nose 7.62 ammo will fuck you up plenty, cops use hollow points to reduce over penetration, the extra expansion is fractions of a fraction of an inch. Which is why militaries don't bitch about the retarded ban, it doesn't matter (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581226) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:51 PM Author: flatulent jewess brother if you want to have some kind of 'pushes glasses up nose and sniffs' over highly technical points of ammo and gun functionality, then start another thread. my point is that you're not carrying much water the minute you start elaborating on why special ammo or weapons made to mimic military-issue weapons are somehow benign or necessary. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581252) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:54 PM Author: arousing prole shrine you are not making a persuasive argument as to why "necessary" should be a limiting factor for anything.
"Materially more dangerous" should be the limiting factor and you have no providing any evidence that this is the case, because there is none. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:56 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base they're utterly harmless and you've provided no argument whatsoever as to why they are extra dangerous (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581293) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:58 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Hollow points serve a legitimate hunting purpose. It increases expansion which helps transfer the kinetic energy from the round to the target. It makes hunting more effective and humane. It also serves a safety purpose insofar as it limits over penetration and reduces how far the bullet will travel if it passes through. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581313) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:09 PM Author: flatulent jewess I understand, more stopping power.
serving a benefit for some varieties of hunting isn't a strong argument.
it's not like these things are never at issue even if you disagree that an issue is present at all. you might even be familiar with this and I'm not saying they weren't just capitulating to some kind of shitlib city council pressure, but the fact remains, you're not taking some kind of 'quietly informed positions of the masses'
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/passaic/wayne/2017/09/29/wayne-gun-range-backtracks-hollow-point-bullet-ban/712157001/ |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:11 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base wtf is the point of that link? That some people are too stupid to know what things are? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581402) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:14 PM Author: flatulent jewess hank, buddy, we get it. people who disagree with you are stupid. anything else? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581434) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:15 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base Your link was to some gun range banning hollow points. It literally said nothing about why or what possible reason could be used to justify such idiocy. There is nothing to disagree about, no point was made at all (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581446) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:55 PM Author: flatulent jewess the link demonstrates that not all people, including responsible gun owners, are in total agreement that hollow points are completely benign. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581815) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:58 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit Or it could be that the range owners didn't want to deal with the increased damage to the targets that would result from the HP.
If hollow points were banned as a safety measure at a rifle range they have much bigger issues. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:13 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base or that one retard in NJ caved to shitlib demands, without any good reason, to prevent the death of paper targets (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581971) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:43 PM Author: Curious temple gun control advocates want all guns banned. that's why "sensible gun control measures" will never fly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581172) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:47 PM Author: flatulent jewess no that's not really true but it sure is an easy position to argue against i.e. nice strawman (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581210) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:05 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube After Heller and it's aftermath, how can you argue that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581362) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:04 PM Author: Effete sandwich I agree with you last paragraph and consider myself one. It’s not that a military couldn’t defeat us, it’s that it would be really hard as the Middle East demonstrates. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581352) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:25 PM Author: arousing prole shrine people in favor of assault weapons bans have never been able to define what an assault weapon is, nor have they provided evidence or even a convincing argument that there is a reason why assault weapons should be illegal when any other semi-automatic rifle is not.
Because they hate and fear guns. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:28 PM Author: flatulent jewess you're arguably biased on this issue but your personal enjoyment of guns notwithstanding it's weak and attenuated to simply say that it's impossible to define 'assault weapons.' then don't fucking define it and just call it increased regulation. nothing there runs afoul of the 2nd amendment unless you take some kind of tortured and compromised 'just the words' originalist stance. even your homeboy gorsuch can make reasonable distinctions.
most reasonable people arguing for additional gun control are arguing for broader general regulation and sensible narrower regulation on guns that have dangerous features that are designed for warfare and other activities that no ordinary citizen can legally engage in. make certain firing systems, clips, and ammunition illegal. we already do that some extent or at the very least intensely regulate.
fuck U and muscadine for making me align with spaceporn on this shit. it's not like there will ever be substantial increases in regulation anyway. we have proved over and over for the last 20 years that 're completely immune to that possibility. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:32 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base no they aren't, what an empty series of talking point phrases (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581077) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:40 PM Author: flatulent jewess you always get unhinged in gun control threads little bro but nice to see you all the same (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581137) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:42 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base I'm always entirely reasonable and win, because I actually know wtf I'm talking about. I'm happy to debate concrete proposals that can be shown to increase public safety, but shitlibs just can't manage it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581165) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:52 PM Author: flatulent jewess you sound dumber than spaceporn when you post like that (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581257) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:57 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base (quotmo) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581305) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:07 PM Author: Effete sandwich He’s irrefutable which is why you went non-sequitur. What’s the regulation you’d support? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581373) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:13 PM Author: flatulent jewess he's irrefutable because he says he's always right? must be nice!
i explain generally what regulations I support elsewhere in the thread. make it harder to get and transact guns of all kinds, and then track and demand additional compliance from owners, for starters. most law enforcement people I have known over the years endorse some combination of that. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:17 PM Author: arousing prole shrine then why are you talking about "assault weapons" at all? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581470) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:19 PM Author: flatulent jewess because it's responsive to the OP? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581493) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:17 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base that's still extraordinarily vague and has nothing to do with assault weapons, jfc (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581471) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:29 PM Author: Effete sandwich “I'm happy to debate concrete proposals that can be shown to increase public safety,.”
Let’s hear them buttfuck. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:34 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube Hey man, facts are facts. Automatic weapons are banned, all of these "assault weapon" bans are totally bullshit and merely ban certain cosmetic features of certain guns.
Also, the guns you talk about are responsible for some sort of crazy small percentage of gun crime.
I'm not really a gun nut. You want to really go after guns, ban handguns. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:55 PM Author: flatulent jewess you sound reasonable on some points here and I would never argue to ban guns. it's just not feasible on top of being needless and I don't care what shitlibs post on Facebook about Australia.
I understand the issue with banning 'assault weapons' plenty well and I agree. more regulation and better policies are still necessary. we have insane gun violence in this country that benefits exactly nobody and nothing except for corporate interests for some kind of abstract 'ARE GUNS MATTER' paranoid principle about the necessity of gun ownership for our democracy to function properly. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:12 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube "insane gun violence" = handguns, statistically.
"insane gun violence" = mostly illegally used/ owned guns.
"insane gun violence" = best argument for why legal gun ownership is so important. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:18 PM Author: flatulent jewess yes, very difficult problem
I'm counting accidental deaths and suicides and mass shootings (largely carried out with legal weapons) in there although I realize you likely disagree on the validity of that. what you may be alluding to is 'let them shoot it out in the ghetto cause they're gonna do it anyway' and I disagree with that position for sure.
third para is a mixed bag but if anything came of the zimmerhero debates it's that gun advocates have a hard time pointing to valid statistics about the number of lives saved by private gun ownership |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:20 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base Obama's DOJ said over 100k defensive uses per year, and that's only counting shit we can get records of (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581503) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:25 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube tbf, if you care about black people, think about how strict gun laws will effect mass incarceration of black men. I already see a ton of illegal firearms/ possession of a gun by a felon type offenses as it is.
The problem with ghetto violence is that a large percentage of those firearms are being held illegally anyways. How is making them more illegal going to help? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:37 PM Author: flatulent jewess I don't care about this issue vis-a-vis guns and you're discounting the massive number of them who can't own guns legally due to felony or predicate misdemeanor convictions. acting like the legality of the guns themselves is a main driver for cyclical black incarceration and violence is a ridiculous deflection because you assume I'm some ardent shitlib who can't maintain internal consistence with my paternalism. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581654) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:13 PM Author: Effete sandwich Small price to pay to not have western civilization fall.
If the us loses its right-wing gun nuts, whose subtle deterrence is the only thing that will prevent future left wingers from totally destroying the country. Without guns the US will fail. Once we fail we can’t play global police. At that point someone will feel ballsy and try to conquer us and/or start WW3. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:36 PM Author: arousing prole shrine it's certainly possible to arbitrarily define an assault weapon, but if you are going to ban a gun for having "dangerous" features, the burden on you is to show that these features are marginally more dangerous such that they should be banned - relative to any other gun.
Just saying they are dangerous, or have features designed for warfare is not relevant. If people want to play IRL Call of Duty at the range, the presumption of liberty rights wins out unless you have a compelling reason why they should not be able to play with their toys.
Of course you cant, because the truth is that no "assault weapon" is materially more dangerous than any other semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine, and that the danger of rifles is completely dwarfed by the danger of standard semi-automatic handguns which are responsible for almost all gun crime and violence.
So if you want to argue that all semi automatic weapons, but especially hand guns should be banned, that's at least a consistent argument, but try saying that and as a politician you will be voted out of office immediately.
Trying to win marginal victories on shit like assault weapons bans is just a erosion of the right to private gun ownership, just like 3rd trimester abortion parental notification is just an attempt to erode abortion rights. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:38 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581121) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:55 PM Author: arousing prole shrine why is the OP ignoring my response? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581282) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:01 PM Author: flatulent jewess that's all legally correct and reasonable but it's not the argument I hear made most often. you're Stanford educated lawyer with a high IQ who has actually spent some time thinking about the legal and policy implications. my OP was meant to shit on the GUN NUT arguments against regulation.
that being said, we can all think of plenty or legal and beneficial regulatory schemes for semi-autos. if you want to play seal team and make it look like a military rifle, knock yourself out, but want the feds and local government to track, tax, and regulate your enjoyment of this activity as they do many other things.
constant fear of 'erosion of rights' is just an expression of your cantankerous old reptile persona shifting on its heat rock. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:06 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base tracking, taxing and regulating is a waste of time. You can't just do shit for literally no reason (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581366) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:09 PM Author: arousing prole shrine Why should the feds track, tax or regulate my plastic black gun any more than any other gun?
The erosion of rights is absolutely true. Otherwise there would be no push for assault weapons bans which are conceptually indefensible.
How many times do people say "well we have to do something" - its a fucking dog and pony act to keep gun control in the narrative and energize the base with a "win" |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:23 PM Author: flatulent jewess they would have to apply more extensive regulation to most 'long guns,' particularly new purchases.
erosion of rights is an easy abstract threat to dive for in the argument. go ahead and make a serious argument that the government is going to gain the political will, wherewithal, and resources necessary to whittle gun ownership rights down to grandfathered antiques. you love your plastic army gun, I get it, but settle down.
third paragraph is bitter carping about thew political process. I don't think obama was thinking 'hehe good wedge hehe' when he practically had tears in his eyes calling for action after sandy hook. I know you hate obama so this is falling on deaf ears and just making you angry, but take an object look at where your fear comes from. you're perfectly reasonable on the issue of there be no good legal argument against military-looking weapons but then you get outraged over abstract threats to your right to own highly lethal toys. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:24 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base What fucking regulation? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581550) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:25 PM Author: arousing prole shrine why long guns and not handguns? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581554) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:38 PM Author: flatulent jewess I don't know to what extent gun control advocates classify handguns as 'assault weapons'
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:06 PM Author: Effete sandwich There shouldn’t be mother fucker. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. This is the one place on earth they SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED and we’re keeping it that way. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581368) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:45 PM Author: Curious temple their constant use of the term "long guns" really grinds my gears (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581189) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:54 PM Author: arousing prole shrine i'm okay with that since it focuses on concealability which is a real factor. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581280) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:57 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base ehhhh, has anybody ever been murdered with an sbr? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581299) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:00 PM Author: arousing prole shrine probably, but not in a way where it being a SBR matters.
I mean more uzis and sawed off shotguns. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:02 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base When have those been used either?
If you plan to rock and roll a long coat is cheap |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:30 PM Author: sienna mind-boggling stead gas yourself (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581063) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:39 PM Author: Gaped candlestick maker (guy who just carefully built a huge strawman) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581133) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:30 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base a handgun with a magazine is sufficient for 99.99999 percent of all murders
if a couple fucks break into my house I'd like to shoot them with a rifle
so I get a rifle |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:40 PM Author: swollen whorehouse I own a dozen guns, including 6 riffles. However, my go to in any home invasion would be my shotgun, not my riffles. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581139) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:41 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base your choice, but 30 chances is better than 6-8 and follow up shots matter
Mine is a glock 17 but I still want the option |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:42 PM Author: swollen whorehouse 30 round mags are banned in California. You only get 10. Plus it's nearly impossible to miss with a shotgun at close range. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581159) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:43 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base At close range a shotgun has very minimal spread, it's still easy to miss (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581168) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:44 PM Author: arousing prole shrine I have 2 AR-15's with 10 round magazines ready to go because of the fucking mag limit and bullet button. Trying to get the 10 round Sig .45 ACP imported as well.
Also still waiting to hear back on the PI thing. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:45 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base Why not just go with a handgun then? Those are only limited to the ten round mags right? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581193) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:49 PM Author: arousing prole shrine everything is limited to 10 round mags. I am a much better shot with the AR-15 and currently the only handguns I have are an 8 round sig for my wife, a 10 round .22 target pistol and about to get a 6 round .357. The 10 round .45 is not for sale in CA, need my mom to gift it to me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581221) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:50 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base .45 is overrated (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581240) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:56 PM Author: arousing prole shrine so if the best I can do is 10 round magazines, not matter what, just cuck it and get a SIG 226 instead of the 227?
I am not spending the money for 10mm ammo. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:59 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base I'd definitely prefer less recoil, shot placement is 99% of the game. Do you really think .07 inches of extra wound cavity is ever going to save your ass? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581326) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:01 PM Author: arousing prole shrine .07 inches of diameter results in a wound cavity of 30-40 times the volume. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581339) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:04 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base I think your math is a little off there, and bleeding out takes minutes regardless, the fight is resolved before that starts to matter. There are videos of doods taking multiple rounds to the chest and just keeping on. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581349) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:06 PM Author: swollen whorehouse And that's another reason to go with a shotgun. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581369) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:42 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube My shotguns all have 3 round plug, which kind of sucks.
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:44 PM Author: Obsidian Excitant Potus Base we'll take it out, you can do it without tools and an extended tube is like 12 dollars for most models (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581175) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:49 PM Author: arousing prole shrine that's probably a felony in CA. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581233) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:10 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube I don't want to get DNR pwned when I go out. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581390) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:17 PM Author: Effete sandwich It takes 5 minutes to put back in. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581475) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:22 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube Can you imagine the look on the DNR officer's face on his gator as he cruises on up and sees me frantically trying to put the plug back in? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581528) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:37 PM Author: Effete sandwich ????
Put it back when you leave to hunt. Pull it out when you get home. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:42 PM Author: sinister multi-colored public bath headpube hahah yea I guess that would be a solution to that problem (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581701) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:45 PM Author: Effete sandwich What’s a shotgun plug? Do I shove it up my ass? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581724) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:44 PM Author: swollen whorehouse I keep my Beretta M9 locked in my nightstand. I would also have that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581178) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:17 PM Author: Effete sandwich ROFL take it out. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581464) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:45 PM Author: Effete sandwich A nation with 10MM gun nuts with assault rifles is a poor target for conquest or a dictatorship. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581194) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2017 1:32 AM Author: cordovan heady plaza Only 10 million? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34585490) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 4:46 PM Author: deranged forum electric furnace None of the provided arguments do it, that's correct.
The real argument is that liberals want to ban guns to emasculate the populace, and insofar as that's what we're dealing with, we need to oppose them because the symbolic value of guns as representation of masculinity is one of the things standing between us and being humiliated by liberal nancyboys.
I would not like it to be this way. I would like to live in a society with a rational, dispassionate discussion about guns. In this context I might support the liberal proposals. But insofar as the conversation about guns is a proxy war for a larger discussion about the individual vs. the nanny state, well, I'm on team guns. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:08 PM Author: stimulating piazza Cr. I've never owned or fired a gun but fuck shitlibs (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581377) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:00 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit We should also ban niggers. They are very dangerous, serve no legitimate purpose and it would result in a decrease in crime. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581327) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:49 PM Author: Aqua Razzle Orchestra Pit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581759) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:35 PM Author: Aromatic light tanning salon Seems fair. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582126) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 5:37 PM Author: elite puppy (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34581657) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 6:40 PM Author: arousing prole shrine So what the OP and the pumo in this thread have demonstrated is that "assault weapons" ban is just a code word for an incremental gun grab moving towards a goal that they know is completely politically untenable (banning all semi automatic handguns and rifles). But hey at least we are doing something! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582175) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 9:36 PM Author: Disrespectful international law enforcement agency casino You're making a very lawyerly and rational analysis of a political issue that has more to do with political momentum, emotional arguments, and policy shifts. Nobody came off looking good in this thread because at the core of every dispute is a fundamentally different personal position on the danger and need for guns in society as they exist now. You and others are making a retard argument against retards both at the exclusion of compromising on legislation. Nobody in here made a decent argument for or against increased gun control. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34583475) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2017 7:20 PM Author: Floppy Theater Stage 140 IQ on display folks (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34582445) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2017 2:04 AM Author: bateful zippy parlour wagecucks explain to me the mechanical features that define an assault rifle faggot (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34585605) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2017 2:14 AM Author: sable reading party some office drones need a prop to help them pretend that in another life they could have been somebody they saw in a movie once. a few dozen corpses in a nightclub or a concert every couple months is a small price to pay in comparison. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3782305&forum_id=2#34585645) |