The start of a 4 year disarmament in US

[CUSO]

They can, but there has to be a set of rules to follow... not sure what you mean about your 'point'

I am not sure why you are confusing regulation with banning... they are 2 different things

You just proved my point. Why not let responsible law abiding citizens own whatever guns they like?

 

[byronkentgraham]

They can, but there has to be a set of rules to follow... not sure what you mean about your 'point'

I am not sure why you are confusing regulation with banning... they are 2 different things

My point assault rifles should now be banned in Canada or the US.

 

[byronkentgraham]

They can, but there has to be a set of rules to follow... not sure what you mean about your 'point'

I am not sure why you are confusing regulation with banning... they are 2 different things

That in the US they are in the process of banning them.

My point assault rifles should not be banned in Canada or the US.

 

[CUSO]

Do you even read the news?

That in the US they are in the process of banning them.

My point assault rifles should not be banned in Canada or the US.

 

[byronkentgraham]

Do you even read the news?

Nope, never, why don't you inform me with your worldly ways?

 

[hopper146]

So, Hitler, or the next leader is gonna become a dictator, and overtake his own people.. FOR WHAT? Is this the master plan?

Who said disarming?

How many deaths would there have been at Sandy Hook if the mother was more RESPONSIBLE in her gun/ammo storage and her son didn't have all these weapons to choose from?


So, Obama, or the next leader is gonna become a dictator, and overtake his own people.. FOR WHAT? Is this the master plan?

That is an article about car thefts. What do guns have to do with that?

Do you think guns will reduce car thefts>??

 

[hopper146]

I don't believe the right to bear arms has anything to do with defending yourself against a burglar. It's about being able to defend yourself against the government. Yes, I've listened to the debates, read the articles, watched the news. I believe violent crime going down as gun ownership goes up, is just an added benefit. If there was open carry here, I would be packing daily. As it sits, I know that if some crazy jumps out in a mall with a knife or gun, I'm going to get hurt or killed trying to defend people. Whereas if I was armed the crazy would be the only one hurt or killed. But I guess its better if only the crazy people or criminals have guns, its safer for everyone.

 

[rusty]

Don't forget Obama also wants armor piercing shells banned to the gun owners as well. Give me one good reason why anyone would need an armor piercing shell if they are not in law enforcement or the military. Many names........?

im a little rusty on my history but the canadian goverment in the 70s broke just about every law in regards to personal property and liberty. it was during the henri bourasard days in quebec.so to answer your question, yes i do believe that there is people in the government that not today but someday will need to be slowed down. did everyone forget OKA and the chitfest that could have become.

 

[mareshow]

First off:

60 rd clip LOL

Secondly, Its nice to see that you have so much trust in the government that you want your personal safety done by the same people who manage your taxes... Secondly, the DHS just bought 7000 "personal defense weapons", actually they were 7000 select fire M4s or "assault rifles" but funny how when they want to buy them they are PDW, but if a civilian buys one its a Assault rifle...

That statement sums up my stance on the position. I don't think the answer to gun violence is more guns, as evidenced by the USA's gun violence stats.

Gun violence stats in the US are very misleading, if you remove the gang related gun violence, actual gun violence is very low, Especially in areas where civilian gun ownership is higher.

Your argument about sleds killing people in comparison to weapons is completely off base. There is a MASSIVE difference between people knowingly engaging in dangerous activities, where they are putting themselves in harm's way, and people using weapons to kill OTHER people. When I go out sledding, or even skiing for that matter, I KNOW that it is dangerous and that there is a risk of me injuring or killing myself. This is an acceptable risk to me, and I know what to do to minimize these risks for myself and others.

That's interesting, according to your argument, you should never get in a vehicle and drive. Because statistically every time you get behind the wheel you put someone else's life a risk. Not just because of bad driving but because of mechanical failure as well. Also it's interesting that all these shootings happen in "gun free" zones... and never in other areas.

I believe FDR said it best when he said, "Regulation is the death of Democracy." If you think that restricting my rights will make you safer, then you are gravely mistaken. All it does is take a little bit more freedom out of my life and give it to the criminals who could care less about our legislation. Further more, why would you want to restrict my right to a modern sporting rifle? If i want to spend my hard earned cash on a semi automatic firearm, why shouldn't i be allowed to? You ever gone gopher hunting with a semi auto? its a hoot! Also look at the Long gun registry stats, that was a great use of my tax dollars. For that matter look at the Restricted registry, most firearms crimes in Canada are done with unregistered firearms. And Mag limits, ask any front line police officer if they actually work and they'd probably laugh at you. The NY sheriffs department, in their official statement said that no the new "SAFE" mag limits will do NOTHING.

see for yourself:

also see what the Wisconsin Sheriff said: Wisconsin sheriff urges residents to arm themselves | Fox News

So Sure let them take away more freedom, what's next, no cars over 200 hp? or no more sleds because they are "too damaging" to the environment? Be realistic, if you dont support firearms ownership be quiet about it because after all when they are done with that, all they are going to do is start screaming over other "unsafe" things we do.

 

[mareshow]

oh and if you dont think this is about Guns and the liberal left stomping on the graves of children. Look at this.

Arrest Warrant for Atticus Finch - By Michael James Barton - The Corner - National Review Online

"In the classic film to kill a mocking bird, Atticus Finch shoots a rabid dog that threatens the neighborhood. In 2010, my governor threatening his dog while jogging in Austin (not surprising given our coyote problem in Texas).
It was in this tradition of protecting others that a man in Washington, D.C., came to the rescue of an eleven-year-old child who was being savagely mauled by three pit-bulls. The dogs — illegally unleashed and unsupervised — attacked after they collided with the bike the child was riding. The neighbor began shooting at the dogs to save the child, and was promptly assisted by a nearby D.C. patrol officer who helped the citizen put the dogs down. The child was rushed to surgery to treat wounds to his torso, arms, and legs. For his prompt and decisive action in saving the child’s life, D.C. said they would nominate this heroic neighbor for Citizen of the Year.
Just kidding. The city of Washington, D.C., said they have left open the possibility that the neighbor could be with violating the District’s gun laws. So it seems that city officials are less concerned with the safety of innocent children who have the temerity to ride their bikes than trying to find some pretense to prosecute the good people who jump in to protect them. It appears that after the government institutes gun-control laws for the sake of “the children” it promptly ignores the children and instead dedicates itself to controlling citizens."

 

[snopro]

im a little rusty on my history but the canadian goverment in the 70s broke just about every law in regards to personal property and liberty. it was during the henri bourasard days in quebec.so to answer your question, yes i do believe that there is people in the government that not today but someday will need to be slowed down. did everyone forget OKA and the chitfest that could have become.

Is that a good argument for armour piercing shells Rusty? So you are saying they should be left available for the day the government goes bad and needs to be dealt with by the people? What about all the years till then if this even happens? Just let the bad guys kill our law inforcement individuals until that day happens?

 

[rusty]

Is that a good argument for armour piercing shells Rusty? So you are saying they should be left available for the day the government goes bad and needs to be dealt with by the people? What about all the years till then if this even happens? Just let the bad guys kill our law inforcement individuals until that day happens?

OK lets meet in the middle.. at the stores where they no longer sell them anymore we will put up a sign that asks the bad guys nicely to Not buy any from off the blackmarket. Deal??

 

[snopro]

OK lets meet in the middle.. at the stores where they no longer sell them anymore we will put up a sign that asks the bad guys nicely to Not buy any from off the blackmarket. Deal??

Sounds reasonable. Lol.

 

[mareshow]

Is that a good argument for armour piercing shells Rusty? So you are saying they should be left available for the day the government goes bad and needs to be dealt with by the people? What about all the years till then if this even happens? Just let the bad guys kill our law inforcement individuals until that day happens?

oh armor piercing shells... like this FMJ .223 round (same as 5.56 Nato) as compared to a common 30-06 hunting round... *facepalm* Get your terminology right. Most calibers of Rifle cartridges will penetrate body armor, because they are designed to Penetrate while hunting... Most types of light body armor that police wear are only good for pistol cartridges (travel much slower, designed for short range)

An armor piercing shell is something that a tank or artillery gun would use... an armor piercing bullet, however, is a rather expensive round that not even the army uses (much) because its really a waste of money if you are fighting someone in body armor, as regular projectiles will do the same. They are primarily designed to be anti armor (tanks, armored vehicles, etc).

 

[rusty]

imagine the power of a fmj 7.62....wow a 308 packs a wallop already, let alone a ballastic grade shell accurate to 1000yrds that is already being used by everyone.

 

[snopro]

oh armor piercing shells... like this FMJ .223 round (same as 5.56 Nato) as compared to a common 30-06 hunting round... *facepalm* Get your terminology right. Most calibers of Rifle cartridges will penetrate body armor, because they are designed to Penetrate while hunting... Most types of light body armor that police wear are only good for pistol cartridges (travel much slower, designed for short range)

An armor piercing shell is something that a tank or artillery gun would use... an armor piercing bullet, however, is a rather expensive round that not even the army uses (much) because its really a waste of money if you are fighting someone in body armor, as regular projectiles will do the same. They are primarily designed to be anti armor (tanks, armored vehicles, etc).

Yes I understand the weaknesses of soft armor vests like police officers wear but vests that tactical police forces and combat soldiers wear are plated with various choices of armor and will withstand most military rifle projectiles. I'm assuming when you are needing to take down government forces like Rusty stated you are going to have to become a better marksman and practice on smaller targets like a head? No?

 

[CUSO]

I don't believe the right to bear arms has anything to do with defending yourself against a burglar. It's about being able to defend yourself against the government. Yes, I've listened to the debates, read the articles, watched the news. I believe violent crime going down as gun ownership goes up, is just an added benefit. If there was open carry here, I would be packing daily. As it sits, I know that if some crazy jumps out in a mall with a knife or gun, I'm going to get hurt or killed trying to defend people. Whereas if I was armed the crazy would be the only one hurt or killed. But I guess its better if only the crazy people or criminals have guns, its safer for everyone.

Put down the tin foil hat mister!!

Any U.S. leader that plans to go after their own people would have a tough time getting the most patriotic army to do this..

Just remember what year this is., er I mean decade..

So how does Canada seem safer then, when we have less guns, do you feel so unsafe?


most movies are not real dude.

 

[snopro]

Put down the tin foil hat mister!!

Any U.S. leader that plans to go after their own people would have a tough time getting the most patriotic army to do this..

Just remember what year this is., er I mean decade..

So how does Canada seem safer then, when we have less guns, do you feel so unsafe?


most movies are not real dude.

There are just to many people out there taking Michael Moore to heart....

 

[T-team]

Persay one was ever in a bar fight or something... a useless scuffle.. If you had a hand gun in your pocket... and started losing... You would probably use it in the heat of the moment... I would... Rather than waking up in the morning with some cuts and bruises... SOMEONE would be dead! MORE GUNS is NOT the answer... I hear the same crap from so many places.. PUT ARMED GAURDS IN THE SCHOOLS!!! Thats a GREAT IDEA!!!! Hey.. parents...Would you mind if we hired some armed middle aged men you have never met to come chill in the school your kids school.....dont worry... hes cool we checked it out. What happens when one of THOSE guys goes crazy and hes already inside the school armed....... ITS NOT WORKING!!! lol... Like HOLY CRAP!!! Whats with all these moonshiners thinking that this is a bad idea??? Colombine....Batman shooter.... ANY of these shootings that changed history.... THOSE WERE NOT POWDER MUSKETS OR DEER HUNTING RIFLES!!!!! These are guns that can fire off up to 60 or 70 rounds in under 30 seconds... like.....What kind of guy is going to break into your house that you have to shoot 70 times? The Terminator? And really.... Would you want to fire off that many rounds of high powered ammo in a house probably made of wood with your family all over the place? But dont worry.... The guns arent the problem... Im pretty sure its becuase they arent allowed to have kinder suprise chocolates in the us.... THATS THE PROBLEM!

 

[hopper146]

Depends what you mean by less guns?..Almost every household I know has guns in it. Less guns per person you mean?...How did Hitler get his army to do it?...And leave my damn tinfoil alone..lol....This is what happens when I'm sledless...lol We all know how it works....assault rifles...then anything with more than three shots....then..back to single shot....handguns?....does anyone hunt with a handgun? I guess there is no reason to have one then. The 2nd amendment says the right to bear arms, it does not say "the right to bear arms when hunting, but only with a small capacity cartridge"