Ok, so you like your guns, but why do we have to put up with them.

[spikeydave]

Very pretty pictures.....
Capable of firing off 800 rounds/min (fully automatic AR15), or as fast as you can pull your finger. In a quick test I was able to squeeze an 'air trigger' 45 times (the likely capacity of that clip in the picture) in 11.5 seconds. Lets say, that is fired into a crowd and 30 rounds hit something, with 3 rounds per target in a crowd. that is 10 people dead in 11.5 seconds.

Two swings with a hammer, that would be hard enough to kill someone would take roughly around the same amount of time.

Now, lets say someone enters a crowd and starts swinging a hammer at random people. They may manage to hit and kill 1 person, MAYBE 2 before they could be taken down by 2 or 3 other people. It's very easy to stop someone from swinging a hammer, not so hard to stop a bullet coming at you at 975 m/sec. I would put money on the fact that if someone went wild on someone with a hammer in a crowd, that people would jump in to stop it. If someone opened fire on a crowd, no one is rushing at the shooter to take him down.

Lets get the facts straight. YOU CAN NOT LEGALLY HAVE AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON IN THE US. THE FULLY AUTO FEATURE YOU SPAEK OF IS ILLEGAL AND NOT IN THE MAINSTAY OF AMERICA. YES YOU CAN HAVE A SEMI AUTO, WHICH IN THE CASE OF THE LATEST SHOOTINGS HAS HAD THE EXTENDED MAGS WHICH HAS OR MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE AMOUNT OF INJURY OR DEATHS. A LESSER CAPACITY MAG SUCH AS IN CANADA CAN BE BOUGHT LEGALLY THEN DRILLED OUT TO HOLD THE LARGER CAPACITY. LET'S PULL OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR A$$'S AND GET STIFFER ON PENALTIES TO DETER PEOPLE FORM USING GUNS IN CRIMES AND STOP THE BS OF TRYING TO BAN ALL GUNS BASED ON A FEW INCIDENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED, YES THEY ARE TRAGIC, YES WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHY THEY HAPPENED BUT BANNING THE GUNS DOES NOTHING BUT MAKE THE PEOPLE DEFENCELESS IN TIMES OF UPRISING OR ATTACK. LETS FACE IT WHY DID JAPAN NOT ATTACK AMERICANS ON NATIVE SOIL......THEY OUTRIGHT ADMITTED THEY KNEW THE PEOPLE HAVE ARMS AND NEW THEY WOULD BE OUTNUMBERED, NOT BY MILITARY BUT BY ARMED DEFENSIVE CIVILIANS. WE COULD ALL BE SPEAKING JAPANESE OR DEAD RIGHT NOW IF IT WEREN'T FOR LAWFUL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS IN AMERICA.

 

[Remoth]

Lets get the facts straight. YOU CAN NOT LEGALLY HAVE AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON IN THE US. THE FULLY AUTO FEATURE YOU SPAEK OF IS ILLEGAL AND NOT IN THE MAINSTAY OF AMERICA. YES YOU CAN HAVE A SEMI AUTO, WHICH IN THE CASE OF THE LATEST SHOOTINGS HAS HAD THE EXTENDED MAGS WHICH HAS OR MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE AMOUNT OF INJURY OR DEATHS. A LESSER CAPACITY MAG SUCH AS IN CANADA CAN BE BOUGHT LEGALLY THEN DRILLED OUT TO HOLD THE LARGER CAPACITY. LET'S PULL OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR A$$'S AND GET STIFFER ON PENALTIES TO DETER PEOPLE FORM USING GUNS IN CRIMES AND STOP THE BS OF TRYING TO BAN ALL GUNS BASED ON A FEW INCIDENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED, YES THEY ARE TRAGIC, YES WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHY THEY HAPPENED BUT BANNING THE GUNS DOES NOTHING BUT MAKE THE PEOPLE DEFENCELESS IN TIMES OF UPRISING OR ATTACK. LETS FACE IT WHY DID JAPAN NOT ATTACK AMERICANS ON NATIVE SOIL......THEY OUTRIGHT ADMITTED THEY KNEW THE PEOPLE HAVE ARMS AND NEW THEY WOULD BE OUTNUMBERED, NOT BY MILITARY BUT BY ARMED DEFENSIVE CIVILIANS. WE COULD ALL BE SPEAKING JAPANESE OR DEAD RIGHT NOW IF IT WEREN'T FOR LAWFUL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS IN AMERICA.

Tldr


(Too loud didn't read)

 

[Wilk INStheWEST]

Lets get the facts straight. YOU CAN NOT LEGALLY HAVE AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON IN THE US. THE FULLY AUTO FEATURE YOU SPAEK OF IS ILLEGAL AND NOT IN THE MAINSTAY OF AMERICA. YES YOU CAN HAVE A SEMI AUTO, WHICH IN THE CASE OF THE LATEST SHOOTINGS HAS HAD THE EXTENDED MAGS WHICH HAS OR MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE AMOUNT OF INJURY OR DEATHS. A LESSER CAPACITY MAG SUCH AS IN CANADA CAN BE BOUGHT LEGALLY THEN DRILLED OUT TO HOLD THE LARGER CAPACITY. LET'S PULL OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR A$$'S AND GET STIFFER ON PENALTIES TO DETER PEOPLE FORM USING GUNS IN CRIMES AND STOP THE BS OF TRYING TO BAN ALL GUNS BASED ON A FEW INCIDENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED, YES THEY ARE TRAGIC, YES WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHY THEY HAPPENED BUT BANNING THE GUNS DOES NOTHING BUT MAKE THE PEOPLE DEFENCELESS IN TIMES OF UPRISING OR ATTACK. LETS FACE IT WHY DID JAPAN NOT ATTACK AMERICANS ON NATIVE SOIL......THEY OUTRIGHT ADMITTED THEY KNEW THE PEOPLE HAVE ARMS AND NEW THEY WOULD BE OUTNUMBERED, NOT BY MILITARY BUT BY ARMED DEFENSIVE CIVILIANS. WE COULD ALL BE SPEAKING JAPANESE OR DEAD RIGHT NOW IF IT WEREN'T FOR LAWFUL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS IN AMERICA.

Caps lock does not help you get your point across. Did you read anything past the first 5 words in my post? Everything I posted beyond the first phrase was about the semi-auto. No one on here is saying to 'ban all guns'. And again, you can't speculate on what would have happened in history, but Japan's strategy certainly worked out for them.

 

[whitegold]

Bring on the guns!!! Sad....

 

[Caper11]

Lets get the facts straight. YOU CAN NOT LEGALLY HAVE AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON IN THE US. THE FULLY AUTO FEATURE YOU SPAEK OF IS ILLEGAL AND NOT IN THE MAINSTAY OF AMERICA. YES YOU CAN HAVE A SEMI AUTO, WHICH IN THE CASE OF THE LATEST SHOOTINGS HAS HAD THE EXTENDED MAGS WHICH HAS OR MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE AMOUNT OF INJURY OR DEATHS. A LESSER CAPACITY MAG SUCH AS IN CANADA CAN BE BOUGHT LEGALLY THEN DRILLED OUT TO HOLD THE LARGER CAPACITY. LET'S PULL OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR A$$'S AND GET STIFFER ON PENALTIES TO DETER PEOPLE FORM USING GUNS IN CRIMES AND STOP THE BS OF TRYING TO BAN ALL GUNS BASED ON A FEW INCIDENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED, YES THEY ARE TRAGIC, YES WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHY THEY HAPPENED BUT BANNING THE GUNS DOES NOTHING BUT MAKE THE PEOPLE DEFENCELESS IN TIMES OF UPRISING OR ATTACK. LETS FACE IT WHY DID JAPAN NOT ATTACK AMERICANS ON NATIVE SOIL......THEY OUTRIGHT ADMITTED THEY KNEW THE PEOPLE HAVE ARMS AND NEW THEY WOULD BE OUTNUMBERED, NOT BY MILITARY BUT BY ARMED DEFENSIVE CIVILIANS. WE COULD ALL BE SPEAKING JAPANESE OR DEAD RIGHT NOW IF IT WEREN'T FOR LAWFUL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS IN AMERICA.

Really!!?? Get Your facts straight, You you can own a full auto in certain states, and some states have the assault weapon law, which is a weapon that has select fire capability, ie full auto/semi auto, the .50mbg sniper rifle falls under the assault weapon law in some states.
If you have a prohibited licence in Canada you can own a full auto weapon , I have no idea what it takes to get a prohibited license in Canada.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Riverjet]

Besides that, none of these incidents involved automatic weapons of any kind.

 

[imdoo'n]

Bring on the guns!!! Sad....

sad day for that lads family, nothing will ever bring the family back to before the shooting, very sad.

 

[cdnredneck_t3]

Caps lock does not help you get your point across. Did you read anything past the first 5 words in my post? Everything I posted beyond the first phrase was about the semi-auto. No one on here is saying to 'ban all guns'. And again, you can't speculate on what would have happened in history, but Japan's strategy certainly worked out for them.

Have you ever shot a full auto AR-15? I have (in Vegas), it is not a very useful mode of fire and the mag is empty in 2.26 seconds. If you have ever watched the ultimate worrier they put a Tommy Gun up against a cowboy with two single action six shooters and the cowboy won the challenge. Just because a gun looks scary or has the capability of semi-auto fire does not make it more or less dangerous.

The point you seem to be overlooking is the fact that you are taking away your own rights and means to protect yourself because you are uneducated about firearms and find them "scary". The Japanese military strategy did not work out for them in WWII which is the point. Having armed citizens did however work out very well for the US. The Japanese did not invade US soil because one of the Generals spent time in the US and said an invasion would be futile because there is a rifle behind every blade of grass. They simply took out a military base and tucked tail back for home, leaving the armed American Citizens out of harm.

 

[Wilk INStheWEST]

Have you ever shot a full auto AR-15? I have (in Vegas), it is not a very useful mode of fire and the mag is empty in 2.26 seconds. If you have ever watched the ultimate worrier they put a Tommy Gun up against a cowboy with two single action six shooters and the cowboy won the challenge. Just because a gun looks scary or has the capability of semi-auto fire does not make it more or less dangerous.

The point you seem to be overlooking is the fact that you are taking away your own rights and means to protect yourself because you are uneducated about firearms and find them "scary". The Japanese military strategy did not work out for them in WWII which is the point. Having armed citizens did however work out very well for the US. The Japanese did not invade US soil because one of the Generals spent time in the US and said an invasion would be futile because there is a rifle behind every blade of grass. They simply took out a military base and tucked tail back for home, leaving the armed American Citizens out of harm.

I'm not sure what me firing a fully automatic weapon or not has anything to do with this at all. I know how useless it would be in full auto. The first round or two may hit but the rest will do a serious number on whatever is above and behind your target. Maybe you should read my previous posts before you presume I'm scared of guns. I'm not, and fire shotguns on a regular basis.
However, thanks for proving my point. If a cowboy won with a non semi auto weapon then you should be able to sufficiently 'protect' yourself with a single action weapon as well.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk 2

 

[medler]

You cant get a prohibited license ..people that had selectible fire weapons were grandfathered in to them before the ban was put in place...and pretty sure the weapons were"supposed to be deactivated"..
[
QUOTE=Caper11;1638607]Really!!?? Get Your facts straight, You you can own a full auto in certain states, and some states have the assault weapon law, which is a weapon that has select fire capability, ie full auto/semi auto, the .50mbg sniper rifle falls under the assault weapon law in some states.
If you have a prohibited licence in Canada you can own a full auto weapon , I have no idea what it takes to get a prohibited license in Canada.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]

 

[medler]

Maybe you should get your facts straight .Google it and youll find your answer.yes you can own Full auto rifles

Lets get the facts straight. YOU CAN NOT LEGALLY HAVE AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON IN THE US. THE FULLY AUTO FEATURE YOU SPAEK OF IS ILLEGAL AND NOT IN THE MAINSTAY OF AMERICA. YES YOU CAN HAVE A SEMI AUTO, WHICH IN THE CASE OF THE LATEST SHOOTINGS HAS HAD THE EXTENDED MAGS WHICH HAS OR MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE AMOUNT OF INJURY OR DEATHS. A LESSER CAPACITY MAG SUCH AS IN CANADA CAN BE BOUGHT LEGALLY THEN DRILLED OUT TO HOLD THE LARGER CAPACITY. LET'S PULL OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR A$$'S AND GET STIFFER ON PENALTIES TO DETER PEOPLE FORM USING GUNS IN CRIMES AND STOP THE BS OF TRYING TO BAN ALL GUNS BASED ON A FEW INCIDENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED, YES THEY ARE TRAGIC, YES WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHY THEY HAPPENED BUT BANNING THE GUNS DOES NOTHING BUT MAKE THE PEOPLE DEFENCELESS IN TIMES OF UPRISING OR ATTACK. LETS FACE IT WHY DID JAPAN NOT ATTACK AMERICANS ON NATIVE SOIL......THEY OUTRIGHT ADMITTED THEY KNEW THE PEOPLE HAVE ARMS AND NEW THEY WOULD BE OUTNUMBERED, NOT BY MILITARY BUT BY ARMED DEFENSIVE CIVILIANS. WE COULD ALL BE SPEAKING JAPANESE OR DEAD RIGHT NOW IF IT WEREN'T FOR LAWFUL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS IN AMERICA.

 

[cdnredneck_t3]

I'm not sure what me firing a fully automatic weapon or not has anything to do with this at all. I know how useless it would be in full auto. The first round or two may hit but the rest will do a serious number on whatever is above and behind your target. Maybe you should read my previous posts before you presume I'm scared of guns. I'm not, and fire shotguns on a regular basis.
However, thanks for proving my point. If a cowboy won with a non semi auto weapon then you should be able to sufficiently 'protect' yourself with a single action weapon as well.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk 2

Thanks for proving my point that when it comes to guns you don't know what you are talking about. The way the law stands in Canada I can not carry a firearm for defence, so your last statement is false.

P.S. Single action means that depressing the trigger will only allow the the hammer forward, it will not cycle the firearm. The hammer must be set manually. A semi-auto pistol can also be single action such as the Colt 1911.

 

[cs5]

Hey, guess what, laws have changed to mitigate these. I haven't been in a bar/restaurant/public place in Canada that allowed smoking in about 10 years. 40 years ago people were free to smoke where ever they wanted. Smoke on an airplane? Sure, why not. The government realized that a lot of people were dying this way, and they changed the laws, thereby altering people's freedoms, and removed smoking from public places. I'm sure you were completely against those laws as well.
Again, 40 years ago there wasn't much of a problem with people drinking and driving. They changed those laws and cracked down on it, and there is less drunk driving now than there was on the 60s and 70s. Were you against those laws as well?
These things have changed, so why is the US following a VERY VAGUE amendment in their constitution from 236 years ago, and now that it may be controlled, not removed, but controlled people are going crazy about it. Yes, the US was built on war, along with the majority of the countries in this world, but that doesn't mean that their citizens are still at war, as they were when the constitution was ratified.

I only made it to page 4 so forgive me if someone already brought this up but the fact of the matter is you could make ALL guns totally illegal and it would not stop some nut job from getting his hands on one to carry out this senseless act. Drugs are illegal yet somehow magically people still find a way to get them. People need to respect each other and value human life but sadly that is a dream. Yes you could ban assault rifles but how are you going to collect the ones already out there? Send the military door to door to search every home for firearms??????? We all know how that turned out.

 

[NeilV]

Really!!?? Get Your facts straight, You you can own a full auto in certain states, and some states have the assault weapon law, which is a weapon that has select fire capability, ie full auto/semi auto, the .50mbg sniper rifle falls under the assault weapon law in some states.
If you have a prohibited licence in Canada you can own a full auto weapon , I have no idea what it takes to get a prohibited license in Canada.

There is no way to get a prohibited license in canada. if you owned a firearm before it became prohibited it would grandfather in.

 

[NeilV]

Thanks for proving my point that when it comes to guns you don't know what you are talking about. The way the law stands in Canada I can not carry a firearm for defence, so your last statement is false.

P.S. Single action means that depressing the trigger will only allow the the hammer forward, it will not cycle the firearm. The hammer must be set manually. A semi-auto pistol can also be single action such as the Colt 1911.

you actually can get a permit to carry a restricted or prohibited firearm in canada. the most common permit is for people working in remote locations to have protection from animals, but there is also legislation that allows a person to obtain a permit to carry for self defence how it is almost impossible to get one. not exactly sure on the details but from what i remember you need to have 3 documented threats to your life to even be considered to get this permit.

 

[byronkentgraham]

you actually can get a permit to carry a restricted or prohibited firearm in canada. the most common permit is for people working in remote locations to have protection from animals, but there is also legislation that allows a person to obtain a permit to carry for self defence how it is almost impossible to get one. not exactly sure on the details but from what i remember you need to have 3 documented threats to your life to even be considered to get this permit.

People with trap line can get them, but can only be out for the duration you are on your line. Driving to and from the line they have to be in a locked case. Strangely enough they can not be used to put down an animal(coyote or wolf in a foothold trap) they can only be used as protection from bears, cougars, etc.

 

[medler]

Wasn't that permit for trappers to carry a hand gun only though? Not a full auto rifle ?

 

[Caper11]

There is no way to get a prohibited license in canada. if you owned a firearm before it became prohibited it would grandfather in.

There are prohibited licenses out there, just like I mentioned earlier I was not sure how to get one, now I know. Not that it ever mattered to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GYMBRAT]

People with trap line can get them, but can only be out for the duration you are on your line. Driving to and from the line they have to be in a locked case. Strangely enough they can not be used to put down an animal(coyote or wolf in a foothold trap) they can only be used as protection from bears, cougars, etc.

BOOOOM.......That damn wolf, yoti dog, cougar, hell even deer was running right at me, I HAD to shoot!!!

 

[byronkentgraham]

Wasn't that permit for trappers to carry a hand gun only though? Not a full auto rifle ?

Just a permit to open carry a handgun.