BF2S Forums Gun politics, firearms ownership, and US 2nd amendment discussion

-Sh1fty- wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

OK, but I still think shifty believes the Koreans in that pic have M-16's or something.

Guy on the right has a mini-14. It's just like the AR-15. It has the same sights, it fires the same bullet, if can have the same ammo capacity, the only difference is it isn't evil and black and doesn't have an evil pistol grip and both are semi automatic.

It's the same fucking weapon but Feinstein thinks they aren't.

The mini-14 is a semi-auto carbine, not an assault rifle. The AR-15 is just a semi-auto rifle, not an assault rifle. But that wasn't my point.

Anyway, you're still avoiding my question.

UN13 I have no damn clue what the Kennedy brothers were shot with. Happy?

Heard JFK was with a hunting rifle actually.

Italian Carcano for JFK.

I always thought Bobby was killed with a shotgun but it seems I was mistaken. A .22 pistol.

Last edited by M.O.A.B (2013-01-25 12:17:31)

Jay wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

And yet without SWAT, we get another NH don't we? I mean you did say that could never happen again because SWAT exists.

Does a 38,000 citizen town need 12 dedicated SWAT officers? My hometown was the same size and I think we probably had twelve full time cops period.

Wait wait wait, I was under the assumption that SWAT members did regular cop duties too, only difference is they have done/do SWAT training and put on their SWAT clothes when needed. Least that's what they do here in Straya.

It depends on the location.  A place like LA has dedicated SWAT teams.  A place like Podunk, IL (similar to most of your backwards cities in UK/AUS) will have regular cops with SWAT training.

Ask Jay, he sees it as a militarization of the police and a Freudian compensation portrayal by ex military members longing for the days they spent in rice paddies and the desolate moonscapes of Afghanistan.  I think his pyschoanalysis is a page back or so, it's very scholarly and insightful.

/trivia

I was smoking when I took this picture a minute ago.

The idea that US gun rampages stem from a culture of violence was a "self-serving lie promulgated by fundamentalist religious types and America's propaganda-savvy gun-pimps", he wrote. In reality the US had a "Kardashian culture" which preferred to read and watch comedies, romances and super-heroes, rather than stories involving gun violence.

Much of the opposition to gun control stemmed from paranoia about the federal government, King argued. "These guys and gals actually believe that dictatorship will follow disarmament, with tanks in the streets of Topeka."

He assured gun owners that no one wanted to take away their hunting rifles, shotguns or pistols, as long as they held no more than 10 rounds. "If you can't kill a home invader (or your wife, up in the middle of the night to get a snack from the fridge) with ten shots, you need to go back to the local shooting range."

The mockery continued when he noted semi-automatics had only two purposes: to kill people, and to let their owners go to a shooting range, "yell yeehaw, and get all horny at the rapid fire and the burning vapor spurting from the end of the barrel".

a stephen king polemic? lol.

Every gun range I've been to frowns on spastic, uncontrolled firing. But it's your dime; spend it to look like a douche, I guess.

Here's the full Feinstein bill: http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/ … e69f517fb4

I suggest you all read it in it's entirety; as it criminalizes virtually anything semiautomatic not fed by a tube or internal magazine (exceptions: Mini-30/14, M1 Garand), along with high cap mags. Of course the bill doesn't apply to any government employee or police officer, on duty, off duty, or retired.

There is no need for gun control. Law-abiding citizens purchase guns and do not commit crimes. You can sell them an M1 Garand or a fully automatic M4A1 with all their tacticool gadgets and it won't change a thing. Criminals do not obey laws, period. There is no argument anybody advocating gun control can use in their favor. The statistics simply aren't in your favor. Wake up and face reality. There are 270 million registered guns in the United States. No amount of laws is going to change that number and if weapons are seized it will only leave the criminals with weapons.

If you think safety has anything to do with it, whatever happened to personal responsibility? If you fuck up, you face the consequences. If you or your kids accidentally shoot yourself it is not the job of the government to come in and plan daddy. This also applies to drug use, alcohol, sex, etc. The government isn't our "Big Brother" or dad whom we must seek for discipline. If you fuck up, the government is to punish you, but it is not to punish you preemptively.

The Constitution of the United States is to be considered a freaking sacred Bible by which to run the country. It took our forefathers a long time to write it up, and many drafts and corrections were made in order to produce a document as close to perfection as possible. If the Second Amendment is "old" and needs to be reevaluated, then the same can be applied to every Constitution. When that happens there is no more value and our Amendments don't mean zilch. Our Second Amendment is not to be infringed upon, and currently it is so thanks to people like Feinstein.

The U.S. military is sworn to uphold the Constitution, not the President or Congress' laws, first. This is another simple example of the many proofs we hold to show how important this document is.

So whats your solution to spree shootings oh wise one?