some facts about Guns and ideas about guns in america

[Blackking]

First off those were seperate parts of the bill. The assult weapon/clip size ban could have been denied, while the rest was passed.

Second the "assult weapons" ban is not intrusive in my opinion. You say clip limitations don't make sense. Well I say huge clip sizes don't makes sense, unless you plan on killing a bunch of people. Same with ASSULT weapons. They were created for military use, it doesn't make sense that citizens have them.

And to your "criminals don't follow rules" argument. Why do we have any laws? Criminals don't follow them anyway. We should just throw out all the laws and the good people will be good

There were separate parts of the bill yes - but have you paid attention to the rhetoric of the people adding in those other parts. One one side you have politicians who want to protect citizens rights.. on the other side you have people who want background checks + all that other sh1t. There really isn't too many in between- which is why those people added in all that sh1t and cause the bill to fail.

We have rules so that if someone breaks them, they can be punished and rehabilitated. We have an a prison system filled with millions of non-violent criminals because of retarded drug legislation. Now we want proposals that will fine and lock people up because they have clips that can hold more than 7 or 10 bullets??? I could clear my entire office out right now with a revolver - so all of those proposals are pretty stupid and illogical.

One thing that your mind doesn't seem to understand is that it literally doesn't matter if you 'feel' that 11 bullets is too many to have in a weapon at one time. The fact is that the word 'huge' is a subjective term and basically a random as hell opinion. There are rifles that are considered assault weapons .... and to ban those would be very intrusive. -- AND actually not stop violence, limited mass murders, help this issue in ANY way whatsoever... so why do it? Are we going to really be sooo weak that we ban certain items simply to make ourselves feel good about the situation?

What is going to happen when we limited clips, limited types of weapons, require more extensive background checks (even tho the current ones aren't bad in most states), do all the other things in the proposal... and the problem isn't solved or helped at all? How is that good feeling we get- going to feel when the next crazy person blows up a school? or when some takes a hand gun and pops 7 people, reloads and pops another 7? Or when a man stabs his mother wife and children?

Assault weapons are used in a minority of mass shootings. Few mental-health red flags came up before most of the shootings. Domestic violence played a role in 40 percent of mass shootings. At least 11 of the shooters were prohibited from owning guns.

— This week, the Department of Homeland Security released its own study looking at the profile of mass shooters since 1999. One key takeaway? They tended to be young males acting alone using handguns. And very few were ex-military.

So because we are the type of nation that goes into a 10+ year conflict with Iraq over 9-11 when that nation had nothing to do with the sh1t. Because we are the type of nation that give out wealth over to central banks. Because we type of nation that spreads unlimited amounts of money and resources on a fake war on drugs..... I guess it makes sense that we aren't putting 100% of the focus in early childhood programs, and mental health programs. We actually believe that we could have prevented most mass killings and that those things aren't just a fact of life in our culture and environment.

 

[Aizen]

Those modifications were made with the sole purpose of aiding the users in an "assult" situation.

Not necessarily. Many of these mods are to improve accuracy for range shooting or improve reliability for hunting. A person I know added a handle to his shotgun and shot a deer with it. And he used the deer meat to feed his family.

Do they automaticaly make the gun more deadly? No. but they do make the gun user more efficient and dangerous.

When it comes to the bigger end of modifications, you have an argument. But the line drawn in some assault weapons bans looked at minor modifications with an evil eye too. For example, slapping a handle onto a gun should not be some "illegal, OMG, throw-you-in-jail" type of mod to freak out over. If even adding a handle is off-limits, you're pretty much saying, "You cannot change your gun at all. You buy it and it cannot change at all - even if the job you did to your gun took less than 5 minutes."

Why would a law abiding citizen need a clip with more that 10 bullets?

Why not have more than 10 bullets? Dianne Feinstein basically tried to confine people to what the smaller end of pistols can hold. The narrow Springfield Armory 1911 pistol clip holds 7 rounds. A Glock 19 holds 15 rounds. Basically, you could not even own a Glock. Not some super duper machine gun - just a basic Glock. Again, we are not even anywhere near the capacity of large drums that hold 50 or 100 rounds. The whole ban was to basically put people into a small pistol level of capacity. Again, emphasis on small.

 

[Blackking]

Why would a law abiding citizen need a clip with more that 10 bullets?

I don't need a flat screen TV or food in my fridge that contains Fructose or other bad ingredients. I don't need a laptop. I have a right to have those things so I get them. Some people eat hotdogs, unhealthy food will Always kill more people than guns, but people are still allowed to have those things.

It's a right. What if I was a gun enthusiast... or weapons historian. I can't test sh1t out or own my passion just because someone else doesn't 'feel' I needed it. Well, good thing every feeling doesn't effect every right, and good thing that studies show that limits on clips would not prevent these violent acts.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

There were separate of the bill yes - but have you paid attention to the rhetoric of the people adding in those other parts. One one side you have politicians who want to protect citizens rights.. on the other side you have people who want background checks + all that other sh1t. There really isn't too many in between- which is why those people added in all that sh1t and cause the bill to fail.

We have rules so that if someone breaks them, they can be punished and rehabilitated. We have an a prison system filled with millions of non-violent criminals because of retarded drug legislation. Now we want proposals that will fine and lock people up because they have clips that can hold more than 7 or 10 bullets??? I could clear my entire office out right now with a revolver - so all of those proposals are pretty stupid and illogical.

One thing that your mind doesn't seem to understand is that it literally doesn't matter if you 'feel' that 11 bullets is too many to have in a weapon at one time. The fact is that the word 'huge' is a subjective term and basically a random as hell opinion. There are rifles that are considered assault weapons .... and to ban those would be very intrusive. -- AND actually not stop violence, limited mass murders, help this issue in ANY way whatsoever... so why do it? Are we going to really be sooo weak that we ban certain items simply to make ourselves feel good about the situation?

What is going to happen when we limited clips, limited types of weapons, require more extensive background checks (even tho the current ones aren't bad in most states), do all the other things in the proposal... and the problem isn't solved or helped at all? How is that good feeling we get- going to feel when the next crazy person blows up a school? or when some takes a hand gun and pops 7 people, reloads and pops another 7? Or when a man stabs his mother wife and children?

Assault weapons are used in a minority of mass shootings. Few mental-health red flags came up before most of the shootings. Domestic violence played a role in 40 percent of mass shootings. At least 11 of the shooters were prohibited from owning guns.

— This week, the Department of Homeland Security released its own study looking at the profile of mass shooters since 1999. One key takeaway? They tended to be young males acting alone using handguns. And very few were ex-military.

So because we are the type of nation that goes into a 10+ year conflict with Iraq over 9-11 when that nation had nothing to do with the sh1t. Because we are the type of nation that give out wealth over to central banks. Because we type of nation that spreads unlimited amounts of money and resources on a fake war on drugs..... I guess it makes sense that we aren't putting 100% of the focus in early childhood programs, and mental health programs. We actually believe that we could have prevented most mass killings and that those things aren't just a fact of life in our culture and environment.

It's apparent you have'nt really read the bill, and are doing the typical pick sides and argue to the death routine that you accuse the rest of Americans of doing. There are plenty of common sense solutions that should be in place in this country. But people would rather cling to "slippery slope" "the sky is falling" rhetoric than to have a real conversation about the problem.

There was nothing about "throwing people in jail" or "banning hunting rifles" in the bill.

As for the ret of your nonsense I already addressed that in another thread.

The sole purpose of backround checks is to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Guns are easy to get because there are no backround checks or laws in place to hold people accountable for where guns end up.

It's amazing that so many black people are in here applauding this bill being shot down. They only stopped the bill because it does effect us so much. The "this wouldn't have stopped sandy hook" argument comes from them, because they are only concerned with little white kids. Anything that has to do with helping little black kids gets blocked and slandered and you stupid nikkas in here promoting their argument.

Got nikkas talking about "why don't Obama care about black issues this much"

This IS a black issue. Our kids are the ones being shot down by illegal guns. That's why they don't want to pass this bill. Gun manufactures make millions of dollars off guns that end up in the hood killing our kids, and you stupid nikkas wanna protest something that could help that

 

[MeachTheMonster]

I don't need a flat screen TV or food in my fridge that contains Fructose or other bad ingredients. I don't need a laptop. I have a right to have those things so I get them. Some people eat hotdogs, unhealthy food will Always kill more people than guns, but people are still allowed to have those things.

None of those were developed for the sole purpose of ending human lives.

It's a right. What if I was a gun enthusiast... or weapons historian. I can't test sh1t out or own my passion just because someone else doesn't 'feel' I needed it. Well, good thing every feeling doesn't effect every right, and good thing that studies show that limits on clips would not prevent these violent acts.

It is a right that is and should be limited by the goverment. There are special provisions for historians to be able to study guns. Rights are ok when they are available and they don't cause harm to people who disagree with them. Currently in America the rights of gun owners are infringing upon the rights of those that don't want to get shot at the movie theatre.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Not necessarily. Many of these mods are to improve accuracy for range shooting or improve reliability for hunting. A person I know added a handle to his shotgun and shot a deer with it. And he used the deer meat to feed his family.

They were made to make the guns more efficient killing machines. Guns are efficient enough. A hunter doesn't need a foldable stock and a pistol grip on his shotgun in order to feed his family.

When it comes to the bigger end of modifications, you have an argument. But the line drawn in some assault weapons bans looked at minor modifications with an evil eye too. For example, slapping a handle onto a gun should not be some "illegal, OMG, throw-you-in-jail" type of mod to freak out over. If even adding a handle is off-limits, you're pretty much saying, "You cannot change your gun at all. You buy it and it cannot change at all - even if the job you did to your gun took less than 5 minutes."

That's not what it's saying at all. It's saying that some modifications make guns too efficient at killing a lot of people.

Why not have more than 10 bullets? Dianne Feinstein basically tried to confine people to what the smaller end of pistols can hold. The narrow Springfield Armory 1911 pistol clip holds 7 rounds. A Glock 19 holds 15 rounds. Basically, you could not even own a Glock. Not some super duper machine gun - just a basic Glock. Again, we are not even anywhere near the capacity of large drums that hold 50 or 100 rounds. The whole ban was to basically put people into a small pistol level of capacity. Again, emphasis on small.

Clip size bans would effect just that "clip sizes" you could still own a glock you'd just have a smaller bullet capacity.

 

[Blackking]

It's apparent you have'nt really read the bill, and are doing the typical pick sides and argue to the death routine that you accuse the rest of Americans of doing. There are plenty of common sense solutions that should be in place in this country. But people would rather cling to "slippery slope" "the sky is falling" rhetoric than to have a real conversation about the problem.

There was nothing about "throwing people in jail" or "banning hunting rifles" in the bill.

As for the ret of your nonsense I already addressed that in another thread.

I read the bill. AND the additional proposals. Have u?

But nothing I said was untrue. The common sense solutions are the mental health checks nothing else. There are 21 executive actions that Obama wants to pass that I agree with... most of those are actually related to solving the issue.

And you basically know what I said is true because you randomly brought up hunting rifles. I don't hunt, I own a handgun that hold only 7. However, I respect others rights.

And I'm curious to know what you believe happens if an assault weapons ban and clip limitations proposal is passed by congress and the S.-- What would be the penalties of being caught with a modified rifle or a gloc???

People are talking about GUN control, when the issue should be mental health control. Mentally ill people can kill or fck things up regardless of guns. Lucky some people have common sense. How the ban on earmarks killed the gun bill

this sh1t might eventually throw off the balance in Washington. Not that I believe it matters too much, but this will help the GOP gain seats.. red state dems will lose seats for fcuking with this issue. NRA controls the freakin majority leader.

9/10 people support background checks... so shouldn't this entire issue simply be left at that? Gun enthusiast aren't going around murking people, so y fck with their rights?

 

[Aizen]

They were made to make the guns more efficient killing machines. Guns are efficient enough. A hunter doesn't need a foldable stock and a pistol grip on his shotgun in order to feed his family.

Not all guns are efficient enough. In fact, many guns are complete and utter crap and people mod them. Why? Because they cannot afford some expensive gun like a $1,000 and up variety. So they take some $100 piece of crap and make it go from an unreliable, dangerous, poorly accurate gun into a respectable tool.

That's not what it's saying at all. It's saying that some modifications make guns too efficient at killing a lot of people.

If you use mods to help you kill people, then yes, that is awful. But those same mods have real world uses and purposes. If I modded something out, it is for perfectly legit reasons. Not to harm any person or try to be some video game character.

Clip size bans would effect just that "clip sizes" you could still own a glock you'd just have a smaller bullet capacity.

Part of the appeal of the Glock is its double-stack magazine which allows it to hold over 10 rounds. People would still buy Glocks but if I were buying and that ban went into effect, I'd just get a 1911. Glock fans may disagree but besides its toughness/reliability (stomp it, run over it with a car and it still works), the magazine capacity was a good selling point for it. Take that away and adios amigo.

 

[Blackking]

Currently in America the rights of gun owners are infringing upon the rights of those that don't want to get shot at the movie theatre.

WOOORRRD?!?

lol, this isn't true at all. You should click around on some of the links I posted.


Only a fool believes that gun rights and gun ownership is the cause of any person being less safe. Do you know how easy it is to build a bomb out of sh1t around your house? Especially if you have internet access and are are antisocial loser who stay online everyday, looking sh1t up?

Movie theaters don't have security like that.... I'd have a better chance of survival if that lame goes on a shooting spree... than if he sets a bomb off.

At the same time I would have a better chance- if people actually realized that the gun wasn't the issue in that situation.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

I read the bill. AND the additional proposals. Have u?

But nothing I said was untrue. The common sense solutions are the mental health checks nothing else. There are 21 executive actions that Obama wants to pass that I agree with... most of those are actually related to solving the issue.

then why are you against the bill? And backround checks for deadly weapons aren't common sense?

And you basically know what I said is true because you randomly brought up hunting rifles. I don't hunt, I own a handgun that hold only 7. However, I respect others rights.

You said:
"There are rifles that are considered assault weapons"

And I assumed you ment hunting rifles. Because "assult rifles" are the very definition of "assult weapons"

And I'm curious to know what you believe happens if an assault weapons ban and clip limitations proposal is passed by congress and the S.-- What would be the penalties of being caught with a modified rifle or a gloc???

The penalties should be fines, and I'm more concerned with the corporations that get away with promoting and selling these items than the citizens that buy them.
Unfortunately we will never get this far into the conversation because people are too stuck arguing sensational rhetoric instead of addressing the problem directly. The big gun companies like it this way. They can continue to muddy the issue enough to have people such as yourself fighting for them to continue to make millions of dollars off the lives of American citezens.

People are talking about GUN control, when the issue should be mental health control. Mentally ill people can kill or fck things up regardless of guns. Lucky some people have common sense. How the ban on earmarks killed the gun bill

Part of "mental health control" is making sure we aren't passing out guns to people who are mentally unfit.

this sh1t might eventually throw off the balance in Washington. Not that I believe it matters too much, but this will help the GOP gain seats.. red state dems will lose seats for fcuking with this issue. NRA controls the freakin majority leader.

And that's a damn shame. Big money runs our goverment and influences the minds of uniformed citizens to have them advocate things that actually hurt them. It's like this on most issues, not just gun control.

9/10 people support background checks... so should this entire issue simply be left at that? Gun enthusiast aren't going around murking people, so y fck with their rights?

That's exactly who are going around murking people.

Gun enthusiasts say they're all about gun safety and respecting the guns, so why is it they try so hard to stop things that would make guns and "gun rights" safer for society as a whole?

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Not all guns are efficient enough. In fact, many guns are complete and utter crap and people mod them. Why? Because they cannot afford some expensive gun like a $1,000 and up variety. So they take some $100 piece of crap and make it go from an unreliable, dangerous, poorly accurate gun into a respectable tool.

so people hunted for thousands of years with rocks, spears, and how and arrows. But you want to tell me a modern gun isn't good enough.

If you use mods to help you kill people, then yes, that is awful. But those same mods have real world uses and purposes. If I modded something out, it is for perfectly legit reasons. Not to harm any person or try to be some video game character.

What are the real world uses and purposes?

Part of the appeal of the Glock is its double-stack magazine which allows it to hold over 10 rounds. People would still buy Glocks but if I were buying and that ban went into effect, I'd just get a 1911. Glock fans may disagree but besides its toughness/reliability (stomp it, run over it with a car and it still works), the magazine capacity was a good selling point for it. Take that away and adios amigo.

This leads me back to the question of why do you need more that 10 rounds per clip?

 

[MeachTheMonster]

WOOORRRD?!?

lol, this isn't true at all. You should click around on some of the links I posted.


Only a fool believes that gun rights and gun ownership is the cause of any person being less safe. Do you know how easy it is to build a bomb out of sh1t around your house? Especially if you have internet access and are are antisocial loser who stay online everyday, looking sh1t up?

Movie theaters don't have security like that.... I'd have a better chance of survival if that lame goes on a shooting spree... than if he sets a bomb off.

At the same time I would have a better chance- if people actually realized that the gun wasn't the issue in that situation.

If bombs are so easy to make, then why do people almost always use guns for mass murder?

 

[Blackking]

then why are you against the bill? And backround checks for deadly weapons aren't common sense?


You said:
"There are rifles that are considered assault weapons"

And I assumed you ment hunting rifles. Because "assult rifles" are the very definition of "assult weapons"


The penalties should be fines, and I'm more concerned with the corporations that get away with promoting and selling these items than the citizens that buy them.
Unfortunately we will never get this far into the conversation because people are too stuck arguing sensational rhetoric instead of addressing the problem directly. The big gun companies like it this way. They can continue to muddy the issue enough to have people such as yourself fighting for them to continue to make millions of dollars off the lives of American citezens.


Part of "mental health control" is making sure we aren't passing out guns to people who are mentally unfit.


And that's a damn shame. Big money runs our goverment and influences the minds of uniformed citizens to have them advocate things that actually hurt them. It's like this on most issues, not just gun control.

9/10 people support background checks... so should this entire issue simply be left at that? Gun enthusiast aren't going around murking people, so y fck with their rights?

That's exactly who are going around murking people.

Gun enthusiasts say they're all about gun safety and respecting the guns, so why is it they try so hard to stop things that would make guns and "gun rights" safer for society as a whole?

First off.. No it is not gun enthusiast that are going around murking people. smh, we examine the root causes of everything except this issue. We examine the profiles of pedophile rapist, and terrorist.. but we want to pretend that gun enthusiast are the one that are responsible for these shootings. And gun bans, limitations, or anything related do not make society safer at all. Review my links on first page.

2. People who support guns usually aren't brain washed the way we are on most issues.. I've been in these debates on both sides. I used to be simple minded and thought that we needed to fight the guns instead of the real issues. Most supporters and advocates are very informed, it's not like the patriot Act or other issues.

3. Our nation is owned by lobbyist.. that's just the way it is. I'm not gonna smack up a random Jewish person simply because Apac supports fck sh1t in the middle East.. And I'm not going to place provisions on random US citizens because NRA controls harry reid and they all are making a killing (lol) off selling accessories. I don't f with the NRA because many of it's members are racist (I could b wrong tho). But they aren't incorrect on many of it's stances.

However, I don't agree that armed citizens can prevent most killings.

4. " continue to make millions of dollars off the lives of American citezens." first I would like to say .... do u need a tissue? Second I would like that say, that you have a limited understanding of the issue. I live in Detroit. I'm not going to blame the violence in my city on Guns. last summer it seems like every other day a b1tches body was ending up in a trunk... I would be foolish to blame that on anything other than limited resources, negative culture, and social-economic situations. Most mass killings are health related or political and not related to the manufacturing or distribution industry.

5. I'm not against the bill, I'm against the pork. lil bits of swine go into every bill and most of it isn't a huge deal... but for some bills it's a huge fcking deal. So just like with bills dealing with Privacy rights- most of it may seem reasonable, but then someone will slide in a pork about internet privacy that I do not agree with. Just like this bill. Watch when the next one comes out how many proposals are in it as well. That makes it so the mental health screen can never get passed... because people like you are crying about Deadly horrible man killing machines and limited clips.

 

[Mr. Somebody]

Doesn't matter really. All of the idiots here are too brainwashed by CNN and mainstream media. Their standard, preprogrammed response to anything gun related: "Ban da gunz! Ban dem all! Dey evil Obama sed so!!"

Its pretty crazy how robotic people are. When you dont any television you can instantly tell the people that due based on how they talk and you're right. They're programmed.

 

[Blackking]

If bombs are so easy to make, then why do people almost always use guns for mass murder?

they are easier... They come already made. You just have to aim and pull the trigger.