According to Wikipedia on violent crime in the US: 1,209,000 in 2010Dilbert_X wrote:
How many times have 'bad-guys come knocking' so far?-Sh1fty- wrote:
Uhh gee I don't know, maybe people using other types of weapons to hurt or steal from others. You think 126lb shifty is going to be ok when 180-200lb bad guy comes knocking? Oh wait I'll just call the cops and ask the guy to wait.Dilbert_X wrote:
If no-one has any firearms what do they need to protect themselves from?
What have you used firearms to protect yourself from?
I prefer shooting with a pistol grip and the retractable stock makes it easier to fit in my small gun case so I have room for mags and other stuff too.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
It's not to make you more responsible - its to slow down a potential murderer. Using your same retarded logic, please tell me why you need a magazine, pistol grip and retractable stock? So you can live out your rambo fantasy?-Sh1fty- wrote:
Please tell me how giving AR-15s fixed magazines and not allowing me to put a pistol grip and retractable stock on my mini 14 makes me more responsible. I can't own a pistol yet but anybody over 21 here can buy a 7 round 1911. They can't get a double-stacked 14 round magazine though because obviously only criminals use those.
I agree with you there. I wasn't meaning it as a black and white ruling, but it should be strict to ensure people are very responsible with something that has the potential to be extremely dangerous.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Imprisoned too? Within limits. There isn't a whole lot you can do if you go on vacation and your safe is stolen/broken into before the police can respond.
Absolutely.On that note, I also think that alarm systems should be mandatory for homeowners with any firearm.
Not worth it according to you, who will only be mildly inconvenienced having bought the wrong size gun bag.Sh1fty wrote:
Slow them down? The off chance that would help slow them down isn't worth making gun ownership harder on 30,000,000 people.
Violent crime with a firearm, or in general?-Sh1fty- wrote:
According to Wikipedia on violent crime in the US: 1,209,000 in 2010Dilbert_X wrote:
How many times have 'bad-guys come knocking' so far?-Sh1fty- wrote:
Uhh gee I don't know, maybe people using other types of weapons to hurt or steal from others. You think 126lb shifty is going to be ok when 180-200lb bad guy comes knocking? Oh wait I'll just call the cops and ask the guy to wait.
That's over a million instances in which the victim would have definitely wanted a gun to defend themself.
30 million people own automatic weapons? Fuck.I prefer shooting with a pistol grip and the retractable stock makes it easier to fit in my small gun case so I have room for mags and other stuff too.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
It's not to make you more responsible - its to slow down a potential murderer. Using your same retarded logic, please tell me why you need a magazine, pistol grip and retractable stock? So you can live out your rambo fantasy?-Sh1fty- wrote:
Please tell me how giving AR-15s fixed magazines and not allowing me to put a pistol grip and retractable stock on my mini 14 makes me more responsible. I can't own a pistol yet but anybody over 21 here can buy a 7 round 1911. They can't get a double-stacked 14 round magazine though because obviously only criminals use those.
Slow them down? The off chance that would help slow them down isn't worth making gun ownership harder on 30,000,000 people. "So you don't mind if more people die as long as you can shoot what you want on the range.?" Ok lets cap car speed at 50mp/h and sports cars are banned.
Have you ever been a victim shifty. I've been in so pretty fucked up places with more than one person who wanted to hurt me, and not once, in any of them did I feel the outcome would have been better if I had a gun or even a knife to pull. Far from it, in any of those situations I only felt that would escalate the situation.-Sh1fty- wrote:
According to Wikipedia on violent crime in the US: 1,209,000 in 2010Dilbert_X wrote:
How many times have 'bad-guys come knocking' so far?-Sh1fty- wrote:
Uhh gee I don't know, maybe people using other types of weapons to hurt or steal from others. You think 126lb shifty is going to be ok when 180-200lb bad guy comes knocking? Oh wait I'll just call the cops and ask the guy to wait.
That's over a million instances in which the victim would have definitely wanted a gun to defend themself.
Last edited by -Whiteroom- (2013-01-04 01:27:15)
You can take out the bolt and store it somewhere else.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Imprisoned too? Within limits. There isn't a whole lot you can do if you go on vacation and your safe is stolen/broken into before the police can respond. On that note, I also think that alarm systems should be mandatory for homeowners with any firearm.
or the firing pinDilbert_X wrote:
You can take out the bolt and store it somewhere else.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Imprisoned too? Within limits. There isn't a whole lot you can do if you go on vacation and your safe is stolen/broken into before the police can respond. On that note, I also think that alarm systems should be mandatory for homeowners with any firearm.
A fixed magazine is making it harder to own a gun? Shifty, think before you post so you don't come across as an idiot. It just makes it more cumbersome to load and means you can't drop clips out of your gun with a press of a button like they do in the movies. Oh the humanity! What oppression!-Sh1fty- wrote:
According to Wikipedia on violent crime in the US: 1,209,000 in 2010I prefer shooting with a pistol grip and the retractable stock makes it easier to fit in my small gun case so I have room for mags and other stuff too.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
It's not to make you more responsible - its to slow down a potential murderer. Using your same retarded logic, please tell me why you need a magazine, pistol grip and retractable stock? So you can live out your rambo fantasy?-Sh1fty- wrote:
Please tell me how giving AR-15s fixed magazines and not allowing me to put a pistol grip and retractable stock on my mini 14 makes me more responsible. I can't own a pistol yet but anybody over 21 here can buy a 7 round 1911. They can't get a double-stacked 14 round magazine though because obviously only criminals use those.
Slow them down? The off chance that would help slow them down isn't worth making gun ownership harder on 30,000,000 people. "So you don't mind if more people die as long as you can shoot what you want on the range.?" Ok lets cap car speed at 50mp/h and sports cars are banned.
Alternatively, you could write the law to except any person that can demonstrate they took responsible measures to store their gun(s) securely.Cybargs wrote:
or the firing pinDilbert_X wrote:
You can take out the bolt and store it somewhere else.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Imprisoned too? Within limits. There isn't a whole lot you can do if you go on vacation and your safe is stolen/broken into before the police can respond. On that note, I also think that alarm systems should be mandatory for homeowners with any firearm.
But no less than five of them.Dilbert_X wrote:
Or just the magazines.
I could see dismantling and scattering them if you were leaving for a long trip, but not to go to the theater or visit your aunt four hours away for her birthday. Like that'll ever be popular practice.Cybargs wrote:
or the firing pinDilbert_X wrote:
You can take out the bolt and store it somewhere else.
I've been in a few fights. Won 2 lost but lost sooo many others. I was a kid back then and the stakes weren't high but if I was going to get jumped or something I'd pull my handgun, shout at them to stand still and I'd GTFO safely. I don't want to shoot anybody unless I absolutely have to.-Whiteroom- wrote:
Have you ever been a victim shifty. I've been in so pretty fucked up places with more than one person who wanted to hurt me, and not once, in any of them did I feel the outcome would have been better if I had a gun or even a knife to pull. Far from it, in any of those situations I only felt that would escalate the situation.-Sh1fty- wrote:
According to Wikipedia on violent crime in the US: 1,209,000 in 2010Dilbert_X wrote:
How many times have 'bad-guys come knocking' so far?
That's over a million instances in which the victim would have definitely wanted a gun to defend themself.
Like jake I can see wanting a handgun for home protection or a rifle for hunting. But more than that? No. A handgun or shotgun will have the same effect as a deterrent to people breaking in as an automatic, and probably better suited for it as well.
Perhaps it makes him feel less paranoid.PrivateVendetta wrote:
a .40 to make sure they stay dead when you shoot them rather than just incapacitated?
Not shoot and scoot anymore then?-Sh1fty- wrote:
I've been in a few fights. Won 2 lost but lost sooo many others. I was a kid back then and the stakes weren't high but if I was going to get jumped or something I'd pull my handgun, shout at them to stand still and I'd GTFO safely. I don't want to shoot anybody unless I absolutely have to.
What are you planning to hunt in California?I only want to own three weapons. A rifle of some sort, preferably high caliber for hunting, a shotgun, and a .40 handgun.
you are off your rocker if you think the left are 'distorting' the truth. some kid with issues would do a lot less damage with a melee weapon than a gun: he can be overpowered, disarmed, knocked the fuck out. a person with a gun shoots from a distance. that's pretty basic, no? you don't hear of many knife massacres, surprisingly enough. a small weedy kid with mental problems couldn't go gung-ho and wipe out 30 people with a melee weapon. he'd just get his ass kicked. a gun changes the balance of power, always, towards the aggressor. and the only solution is to remove the guns or tool-up everyone to that highly-charged, highly-lethal level.13rin wrote:
Funny that none of these proposals made by the left (or anyone here) would have prevented this psycho or any other psycho preceding or succeeding him from hurting people.
This is a textbook example of one side distorting and exploiting a tragedy in order to advance its agenda. Any resulting laws or restrictions is a small victory to them as they inch closer toward their ultimate goal of confiscation.
aynrandroolz wrote:
some kid with issues would do a lot less damage with a melee weapon than a gun: he can be overpowered, disarmed, knocked the fuck out.
Gives me wood every time.M.O.A.B wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmKR6evZRQQ
stabbing sprees in asia are pretty bad, but like you said they're rarely as lethal.aynrandroolz wrote:
you are off your rocker if you think the left are 'distorting' the truth. some kid with issues would do a lot less damage with a melee weapon than a gun: he can be overpowered, disarmed, knocked the fuck out. a person with a gun shoots from a distance. that's pretty basic, no? you don't hear of many knife massacres, surprisingly enough. a small weedy kid with mental problems couldn't go gung-ho and wipe out 30 people with a melee weapon. he'd just get his ass kicked. a gun changes the balance of power, always, towards the aggressor. and the only solution is to remove the guns or tool-up everyone to that highly-charged, highly-lethal level.13rin wrote:
Funny that none of these proposals made by the left (or anyone here) would have prevented this psycho or any other psycho preceding or succeeding him from hurting people.
This is a textbook example of one side distorting and exploiting a tragedy in order to advance its agenda. Any resulting laws or restrictions is a small victory to them as they inch closer toward their ultimate goal of confiscation.
a psycho can "hurt people" with any weapon - including his fists - sure. but it's about damage control in this case, not demonizing guns. guns are highly efficient at killing people; it's what they are designed to do. a crazy person with a machete or a baseball bat is going to have a harder time carving up 30 innocent people in a spree. you are deluded if you think there's some sort of 'communist-leftist' conspiracy here. your ideology is blinding rational thought.
Last edited by Trotskygrad (2013-01-04 10:59:56)
