Viewing 346 reply threads

  • Author

    Posts

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 21933

      the NRA represents MANUFACTURERS, not the 2nd Amendment, and so Bloomberg is trying to create change by lobbying against the lobby:http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/15/us/bloomberg-gun-safety-initiative/index.html?hpt=hp_t2Note the target market (women/mothers) and the goal (expanded background checks)

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      “I don’t want to lay blame anywhere, but it is a reality that the gun lobby has an incredible amount of political influence with members of Congress in Washington,” Mark Kelly, a prominent gun control advocate, told CNN in December. Kelly’s wife is former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was severely wounded in a shooting in Arizona in 2011."I mean, it's very clear that many members take their cues on this issue from the gun lobby," he said.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3341

      How many threads is it now on a subject no one else is interested in attempting to discuss with him, started solely for the purpose of provoking an emotional response? Stupid bastard doesn't even realize he's a troll.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Again, I am not a fan BUT if you note the reason that Bloomberg is so determined is because he’s no longer beholding to anyone politically:http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/michael-bloomberg-i-have-earned-my-place-heaven_786943.htmlThat illustrates the point that the NRA holds sway over politicians because of political and not philosophical issues.  Here's what Bloomberg (correctly) states about the NRA's approach (on behalf of gun maker PROFITS):Mr. Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, said gun control advocates need to learn from the N.R.A. and punish those politicians who fail to support their agenda — even Democrats whose positions otherwise align with his own.“They say, ‘We don’t care. We’re going to go after you,’ ” he said of the N.R.A. “ ‘If you don’t vote with us we’re going to go after your kids and your grandkids and your great-grandkids. And we’re never going to stop.’ ”He added: “We’ve got to make them afraid of us.”

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      How many threads is it now on a subject no one else is interested in attempting to discuss with him, started solely for the purpose of provoking an emotional response? Stupid bastard doesn't even realize he's a troll.

      Buggsy, I don't need any response from you let alone an "emotional" one and if " no one else is interested in attempting to discuss with him" then why are you here? Just ignore the thread, right?The TRUTH is that you are a gun guy and so you don't like any news that is counter to your view on guns and so you want to silence the news (just like Illuminator) by focusing on the guy who posts the news.  Transparent. It's funny to watch people like you run to "defend" the 2nd Amendment while trampling over the 1st.  You can't have it both ways . . . It's not my fault if the news bothers you, so I presume that I will not see you post in this thread again, right?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      http://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/can-bloombergs-new-gun-control-group-take-nra-n82061Bloomberg's group, called Everytown for Gun Safety, is the largest single unified push for tighter restrictions yet organized by the billionaire and former politician who also founded the nationwide Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which spent about $1.7 million on lobbying efforts in 2013, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.The National Rifle Association spent double that amount last year pushing for its agenda. The NRA’s political action committee spent more than $16 million during the 2012 election cycle. It has raised more than $13.7 million already in 2014, and spent only a fraction of that.I have posted that the unreasonable refusal to expect any reasonable restrictive measure may lead to the decision being taken out of gun owner's hands . . .

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      “I have posted that the unreasonable refusal to expect any reasonable restrictive measure may lead to the decision being taken out of gun owner’s hands . . .”You are the fear salesman, that's for sure.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 975

      I have posted that the unreasonable refusal to expect any reasonable restrictive measure may lead to the decision being taken out of gun owner's hands . . .

      Do as we say voluntarily, or you will do as we say involuntarily.Haven't I heard of that one somewhere before?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      ^ this

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      I have posted that the unreasonable refusal to expect any reasonable restrictive measure may lead to the decision being taken out of gun owner's hands . . .

      Do as we say voluntarily, or you will do as we say involuntarily.Haven't I heard of that one somewhere before?

      Close, but not quite. The accurate version is "accept something, show us you at least understand our point of view.  if you don't, then don't blame us if we don't consider your point of view when we implement the changes we want."  That is a point I have made in these threads many times and yet there is not a single meaningful restriction accepted by an gun person in these threads.  Not one, right? Bloomberg's proposal, now backed by $50 million apparently, is not to ban guns its just to close the OBVIOUS and ABSURD loopholes on background checks .  . ..  but  the NRA refuses that . .  and so given that it is a CERTAINTY that there will be more Sandy Hooks . . .  you better believe that your control (as gun owners) hangs in the balance.  That is because the  NRA does not represent the 2nd Amendment or "gun owners.". The NRA represents GUN MAKERS.  Because they do, they fight ALL restriction on guns, no matter how reasonable.  Think of this:  we just had 20+ children gun down with an "assault rifle" and yet no real restrictions on guns yet because the Congress people are cowards controlled by the NRA.  That even though there are obvious reasonable ways to restrict ACCESS to guns that would have very little impact on every day Americans.  That's the rub though, and where the truth comes out.  The NRA is not concerned with "everyday Americans" it is concerned with GUN MAKER PROFITS . . . its a lobby, not a Constitutional think-tank.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      "I have posted that the unreasonable refusal to expect any reasonable restrictive measure may lead to the decision being taken out of gun owner's hands . . ."You are the fear salesman, that's for sure.

      Fair enough, if that is what you want to think, but you might want to worry that I could be a prescient "fear salesman." I imagine bravado would lead you to deny that, but . . I have said that FEAR is what leads some of you guys to blindly do the bidding of the NRA even though they do not represent your interests. The NRA is concerned with PROFITS and that overreaching for profits leads to an unreasonable position that threatens to bring the whole thing down in an overreaction by the NON-GUN OWNER MAJORITY in the country. It is hardly a novel concept in history to suggest that a small minority might overreach and eventually be trampled by a majority. There are many examples.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      We have 20+ kindergarten kids gunned down with an “assault rifle” and yet that still ended up with a paralyzed Congress doing little or nothing. Is it really surprising that a popular former politician could get $50 million together to change that?  Is it surprising at all that that same politician would target MOTHERS to create a political change?  Like it or not, this is the political process in the United States.  Bloomberg, no longer beholding to an electorate, proposes to fight the NRA on the NRA's turf: MONEY.  If the $50 million is true, then Bloomberg is off to a good start and he has a built in structure (Mayors) and there are bound to be plenty more "Sandy Hook" type events to crystalize a base. Who knows if he will succeed, but no one should be surprised.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      Don’t give a crap about the NRA. Never did. Don’t know much about them. Nor do I particularly care. But I do know about freedom. I know that every restrictive law passed brings me less of it, and it never comes back. No, it only goes one way. I also know that citizens scared of the overwhelming responsibility that freedom brings can become frantic to convince others they are right. Useful idiots, they try to peddle their master's wishes using the same implement that influenced them so heavily - fear. "Be afraid! There are too many guns! Let Big Brother take care of you. He can be trusted. Give up the scary responsibilities of freedom, turn your safety over to the government. Have they ever let you down?".

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      I have posted that the unreasonable refusal to expect any reasonable restrictive measure may lead to the decision being taken out of gun owner's hands . . .

      Do as we say voluntarily, or you will do as we say involuntarily.Haven't I heard of that one somewhere before?

      Spartan, just to close the point precisely, let's use your actual words. Hypothetically speaking, if "we" means non-gun owners and "you" means gun owners, then when "we" tell you at some point in the future to "do as we say involuntarily," as you suggest, what will "you" point to from the past as the voluntary proposals that was ignored?  Get the point?  There is not one, right?  In the wake of Sandy Hook and other events, the mouthpiece for gun owners, the NRA has refused any reasonable restrictions on guns, right? The NRA solution is to arm more people and to arm schools, right? (but not at the cost of a tax on guns,lol)Even if you disagree on gun control, which is fine, do you see the point from a pure negotiating perspective?  You cannot complain about the outcome of an event when you cede control to others because you put it in other's hands . . .  "You" might win it all with that approach, but "you" could also lose it all . .  but that was the choice "you" made by refusing to negotiate in good faith. You've only been able to ignore the other side for as long as you have because the other side was not organized and did not have MONEY . .  looks like that could be changing.I know many here would disagree, but I think the best outcome has always been to negotiate in good faith. There is a rightful place for guns in society, but guns are not the issue, gun maker profits are the issue.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Don't give a crap about the NRA. Never did. Don't know much about them. Nor do I particularly care. But I do know about freedom. I know that every restrictive law passed brings me less of it, and it never comes back. No, it only goes one way. I also know that citizens scared of the overwhelming responsibility that freedom brings can become frantic to convince others they are right. Useful idiots, they try to peddle their master's wishes using the same implement that influenced them so heavily - fear. "Be afraid! There are too many guns! Let Big Brother take care of you. He can be trusted. Give up the scary responsibilities of freedom, turn your safety over to the government. Have they ever let you down?".

      I know that you repeatedly take shots at me - and that is fine - but I actually AGREE with you on most of your point above, but just think about what you are saying in the second half of your comment for a second. You are portraying those in favor of gun control as needing "Big Brother" to take care of them WHEN the only reason there are so many guns in this country in the first place is because people like you (gun owners) have done what?  USED BIG BROTHER to restrict gun laws. (lol) The tables are just potentially being turned on you. There is a chance that you may get beaten at your own game, so don't besmirch the other side as "useful idiots" who cant handle freedom and need BIG BROTHER . . .  when they are potentially using their freedom to turn BIG BROTHER against you after you have been using BIG BROTHER to protect you for years. If you are on the right side of the issue, use that freedom and find others who agree and prove your position.Please tell me you get that at least?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      I understand that power corrupts; and the biggest, most powerful entity that most citizens will ever face, and the greatest danger to their safety and well being, is their own government. It has always been thus, and so shall it ever be, regardless of how loudly you champion your ill informed opinions.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      I understand that power corrupts; and the biggest, most powerful entity that most citizens will ever face, and the greatest danger to their safety and well being, is their own government. It has always been thus, and so shall it ever be, regardless of how loudly you champion your ill informed opinions.

      Haha, we are having a conversation in a thread about a fact I correctly predicted months ago (i.e, if all reasonable restrictions were refused they would be implemented by force) and you still can't help yourself but to call my opinions "ill informed" after just saying that people with my views are "useful idiots."Lol. It's been an honor to be in your presence, if only for this brief moment.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Btw Illuminator, when your freedom to have a private stockpile of assault weapons is stripped away you’ll have the corrupt power of the NRA to blame …. although I suppose you’ll blame all those useful idiots who can’t handle freedom.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      It would seem that the aforementioned implementation and the successful prognostication thereof are much exaggerated.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      It would seem that the aforementioned implementation and the successful prognostication thereof are much exaggerated.

      Damn....and here I was hoping you would acknowledge that I was correct!  ;)Oh well, a guy can dream. Lol.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 975

      I have posted that the unreasonable refusal to expect any reasonable restrictive measure may lead to the decision being taken out of gun owner's hands . . .

      Do as we say voluntarily, or you will do as we say involuntarily.Haven't I heard of that one somewhere before?

      Spartan, just to close the point precisely, let's use your actual words. Hypothetically speaking, if "we" means non-gun owners and "you" means gun owners, then when "we" tell you at some point in the future to "do as we say involuntarily," as you suggest, what will "you" point to from the past as the voluntary proposals that was ignored?  Get the point?  There is not one, right?  In the wake of Sandy Hook and other events, the mouthpiece for gun owners, the NRA has refused any reasonable restrictions on guns, right? The NRA solution is to arm more people and to arm schools, right? (but not at the cost of a tax on guns,lol)Even if you disagree on gun control, which is fine, do you see the point from a pure negotiating perspective?  You cannot complain about the outcome of an event when you cede control to others because you put it in other's hands . . .  "You" might win it all with that approach, but "you" could also lose it all . .  but that was the choice "you" made by refusing to negotiate in good faith. You've only been able to ignore the other side for as long as you have because the other side was not organized and did not have MONEY . .  looks like that could be changing.I know many here would disagree, but I think the best outcome has always been to negotiate in good faith. There is a rightful place for guns in society, but guns are not the issue, gun maker profits are the issue.

      Not sure how many times I have said this Vin, it is not a case of saying no to everything, it's a case of saying no to things that don't address the so called problem.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Same thing Spartan. What do you offer?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Btw Illuminator, when your freedom to have a private stockpile of assault weapons is stripped away you'll have the corrupt power of the NRA to blame .... although I suppose you'll blame all those useful idiots who can't handle freedom.

      Isn't going to happen. And, that's not the problem.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Btw Illuminator, when your freedom to have a private stockpile of assault weapons is stripped away you'll have the corrupt power of the NRA to blame .... although I suppose you'll blame all those useful idiots who can't handle freedom.

      Isn't going to happen. And, that's not the problem.

      Of course it's not, but simpletons will be simpletons and hyperbole is the specialty of some

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Btw Illuminator, when your freedom to have a private stockpile of assault weapons is stripped away you'll have the corrupt power of the NRA to blame .... although I suppose you'll blame all those useful idiots who can't handle freedom.

      Isn't going to happen. And, that's not the problem.

      Of course it's not, but simpletons will be simpletons and hyperbole is the specialty of some

      Take it easy Junior,  you sound like Buggsy the 3,535th. Btw, this is a thread I started on guns. I also started threads on the Ukraine and Obamacare. Note you didn't post in either if those threads and you CHOSE to come in this thread to do what? To post about me.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Note village idiot, I responded to a poster that made the same observations everyone BUT YOU has made on this topic, but hasn’t been involved for as long.  Carry on now, wonder where this thread is headed …….

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Note village idiot, I responded to a poster that made the same observations everyone BUT YOU has made on this topic, but hasn't been involved for as long.  Carry on now, wonder where this thread is headed .......

      Lol, you're allergic to the truth Junior

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Lol, you're allergic to the truth Junior

      That wasn't tough to predict.  Can't control himself.  Are you in your Tony Clifton mode?  Pulling our leg there village idiot?    LOLPeople can read captain oblivious

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Lol, you're allergic to the truth Junior

      That wasn't tough to predict.  Can't control himself.  Are you in your Tony Clifton mode?  Pulling our leg there village idiot?    LOLPeople can read captain oblivious

      Ironic that you use the word oblivious so much. How are your reading skills?Lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      $50 million and a lot of exposurehttp://twitchy.com/2014/04/16/we-are-everytown-more-celebs-get-behind-michael-bloombergs-new-gun-safety-campaign/Interesting start

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Lol, you're allergic to the truth Junior

      That wasn't tough to predict.  Can't control himself.  Are you in your Tony Clifton mode?  Pulling our leg there village idiot?    LOLPeople can read captain oblivious

      How are your reading skills?

      Excellent captain oblivious

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Lol, you're allergic to the truth Junior

      That wasn't tough to predict.  Can't control himself.  Are you in your Tony Clifton mode?  Pulling our leg there village idiot?    LOLPeople can read captain oblivious

      How are your reading skills?

      Excellent captain oblivious

      I thought so too, hence the irony of "oblivious" Junior

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Forbes on Everytown and Bloomberg:Everytown for Gun Safety will focus on background checks rather than gun bans, a wise move considering how bans have failed to find a place in federal policymaking. And instead of negative TV attack ads, the funds will establish a grass-roots operation dedicated to ensuring anti-gun voters reach the polls.That’s a page lifted straight from the N.R.A. playbook. The N.R.A. has acted like a well-oiled machine in getting out voters to put their displeasure with pro-gun politicians into action.What the N.R.A. doesn’t have is Bloomberg’s coffers. Forbes estimates Bloomberg is the 29th richest person in the world with a $31.2 billion fortune (rooted in his eponymous financial-information business). When Bloomberg spoke with The New York Times about his idea, he threw out the $50 million figure “as if he were describing the tip he left on a restaurant check.” The N.R.A. typically spends less than half that figure … in an entire year: around $20 million.Bloomberg has put dollars toward environmental causes in the past, and as New York’s mayor, he earned the reputation for paternalism, putting calorie counts on menus and attempting to outlaw Big Gulps. He spoke in detail to FORBES about his time in office and what would come next back in November.Two things are clear: Bloomberg can put more money into his anti-gun plan–make that into any plan–and the N.R.A. has probably never faced a better-funded adversary

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Lol, you're allergic to the truth Junior

      That wasn't tough to predict.  Can't control himself.  Are you in your Tony Clifton mode?  Pulling our leg there village idiot?    LOLPeople can read captain oblivious

      How are your reading skills?

      Excellent captain oblivious

      I thought so too, hence the irony of "oblivious" Junior

      Actually, the "irony" is all over your posts.  Take your pick,  you calling other's liars, you telling others they can't read, you telling others to just ignore you, you telling others they post nothing but nonsense, you telling others that you just want "this" behind you ........... Now respond again captain oblivious

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Lol, you're allergic to the truth Junior

      That wasn't tough to predict.  Can't control himself.  Are you in your Tony Clifton mode?  Pulling our leg there village idiot?    LOLPeople can read captain oblivious

      How are your reading skills?

      Excellent captain oblivious

      I thought so too, hence the irony of "oblivious" Junior

      Actually, the "irony" is all over your posts.  Take your pick,  you calling other's liars, you telling others they can't read, you telling others to just ignore you, you telling others they post nothing but nonsense, you telling others that you just want "this" behind you ........... Now respond again captain oblivious

      I will.  Junior, you're going to have to find some other way to deal with your Daddy issues.  Your secrets are lost now, so all you are to me is boring.  You are the "Great and Magnificent Oz"  with the curtain pulled back  . . .  now, use those "excellent" reading skills to look in a dictionary -- is there a library nearby? -- and look up the word "oblivious" . . . . 

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      In case anyone wants to join:http://everytown.org/lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      We know you will captain oblivious

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      We know you will captain oblivious

      see you around, no doubt  ;)

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      a little help from his friends:R.E.M. HQ        ?  @remhq Americans overwhelmingly support stronger gun laws; @Everytown is their voice. WATCH their new PSA: http://every.tw/stopthisBette Midler        ?  @BetteMidler  Follow This is so disturbing. More than 2 million American kids live in a home where this could happen: http://every.tw/stopthis  via @EverytownThe Roots        ?  @theroots  Follow Every parent should see this before letting their kids play hide and seek - via @everytown : http://every.tw/Stopthis  http://fb.me/2DiaTsJ1POMAR EPPS        ?  @omarepps  Follow More than 2 million American kids live in a home where this could happen! http://every.tw/stopthis S/O @Everytown  #WeAreEverytownJulianne Moore        ?  @_juliannemoore  Follow New org @Everytown is taking on gun safety. WATCH their new PSA: http://every.tw/stopthis  #WeAreEverytownChris Cornell        ?  @chriscornell  Follow What does responsible gun ownership mean? Every parent should see this: http://every.tw/Stopthis  via @Everytown #WeAreEverytown

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      Let the fear mongering begin! Gotta love the irony.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Let the fear mongering begin! Gotta love the irony.

      Not ironic at all . .  intentional . . . turn about is fair play. . . from Forbes:"That’s a page lifted straight from the N.R.A. playbook."This is the target of NRA fear mongering:

      But I do know about freedom. I know that every restrictive law passed brings me less of it, and it never comes back. No, it only goes one way.

      see also this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ju4Gla2odw"For the next six months, [Democratic presidential candidate and then-Vice President of the United States, Al Gore] is going to smear you as the enemy. He will slander you as gun-toting, knuckle-dragging, bloodthirsty maniacs who stand in the way of a safer America. Will you remain silent? I will not remain silent. If we are going to stop this, then it is vital to every law-abiding gun owner in America to register to vote and show up at the polls on Election Day. . . . So, as we set out this year to defeat the divisive forces that would take freedom away, I want to say those fighting words for everyone within the sound of my voice to hear and to heed, and especially for you, Mr. Gore: 'From my cold, dead hands!"charlton_hestonNRA.jpgchickens coming home to roost?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      An inclination to believe that those in power want more power is not fear mongering, it is a basic understanding of human nature.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      An inclination to believe that those in power want more power is not fear mongering, it is a basic understanding of human nature.

      lol, right.  This is fear mongering:NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre warned that—if Democrats prevailed—gun rights were at risk. “This year’s elections,” he wrote, “will decide whether we stop the Barack Obama-Joe Biden-Michael Bloomberg gun-ban machine and save the right to keep and bear arms—or lose much of our Second Amendment freedoms for generations to come.”The funny thing is that he does not care about the 2nd Amendment, but he and gun makers are hoping people like you don't see that.  Here's more:"“[President Obama’s] rich, gun-hating friends in Hollywood, along with anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg, will shower him with the money he needs to strip you of your gun rights,” wrote NRA chief lobbyist Chris Cox in an email blast to members asking for cash"As I said yesterday, I actually agree with limited government and a focus on freedom, but asking for universal background checks is not "those in power want[ing] more power" its taking away power from a profit-driven group that generates profits at the unnecessary cost of human lives. No one is coming to take away all your guns by asking for universal background checks that you refused. They are just exercising their own freedom

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      the truth is that Bloomberg’s “Everytown” should make the NRA rich. People like you should be running to the NRA website to donate, right?  We can’t let Moses down, right?It is also true that Bloomberg's effort will likely fail, its an uphill battle for sure, but its a battle worth having and that is part of the democratic process.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      “People like you should be running to the NRA website to donate, right?”People like me? Didn't I just tell you I don't give a crap about the NRA? Yeah, I did.You're even stupider than I thought.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      "People like you should be running to the NRA website to donate, right?"People like me? Didn't I just tell you I don't give a crap about the NRA? Yeah, I did.You're even stupider than I thought.

      The NRA donor's list include many people who don't own guns and who don't care about the NRA. That was my point, lost on you. There are many people -- just like you -- who donate because they view gun restrictions in the way the NRA wants them to, as some epic battle for "freedom."  Your words yesterday are of the same variety as "Moses" on "the mount" and "cold dead hands.' He was speaking to you, as much as any regular NRA member.I don't care if you think I am stupid, but feel free . . . .change is never easy  ;)

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      But the biggest NRA contributors are . . . shockingly . . .  . 2nd Amendment advocates!!!    Wait?  What?Ok, . . .  I kid, I kid . . . shockingly the NRA big contributors are .  .. .  wait for it . . . its ACTUAL constituents, gun makers and sellers:Organized Corporate Solicitation Program Disproves Longstanding NRA Claim That It's Independent of Gun IndustryWashington, DC--The National Rifle Association (NRA) receives millions of dollars directly from domestic and foreign gun manufacturers and other members of the firearms industry through an organized corporate outreach program according to a new report issued today by the Violence Policy Center (VPC). The report, Blood Money: How the Gun Industry Bankrolls the NRA, reveals that since 2005 contributions from gun industry "corporate partners" to the NRA total between $14.7 million and $38.9 million. Total donations to the NRA from all "corporate partners"--both gun industry and non-gun industry--for the same time period total between $19.8 million and $52.6 million. The vast majority of funds--74 percent--contributed to the NRA from “corporate partners” come from members of the firearms industry: companies involved in the manufacture or sale of firearms or shooting-related products. Despite the NRA's historical claims that it is not financially allied with the gun industry, including the current disclaimer on its website that it “is not affiliated with any firearm or ammunition manufacturers or with any businesses that deal in guns and ammunition,” NRA "corporate partners" include many of the world's best known gunmakers as well as such companies as Xe, the new name of the now infamous Blackwater Worldwide--known for its abuses in the Iraq war--which alone contributed between $500,000 and $999,999 to the NRA since 2005. In a recent promotional brochure, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre promises that the “National Rifle Association’s newly expanded Corporate Partners Program is an opportunity for corporations to partner with the NRA....This program is geared toward your company’s corporate interests.” Among the NRA’s “corporate partners” who gave $25,000 or more to the organization are 22 that manufacture firearms, including such well-known gunmakers as: Arsenal, Inc.; Benelli; Beretta USA Corporation; Browning; DPMS Panther Arms; FNH USA; Glock, Inc.; H&R 1871, LLC; Marlin Firearms; Remington Arms Co., Inc.; SIGARMS, Inc.; Smith & Wesson Corporation; Springfield Armory; and, Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc. Of the 22 gunmakers, 12 manufacture assault weapons. Also among the NRA’s “corporate partners” are numerous high-capacity ammunition magazine manufacturers or vendors. One manufacturer, Beretta, donated one million dollars to the NRA to work to overturn gun control laws in the wake of the 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision in "District of Columbia v. Heller" (which for the first time ever recognized an individual right to possess a handgun in the home for self-defense). VPC Executive Director Josh Sugarmann states, "Today's NRA is a virtual subsidiary of the gun industry. While the NRA portrays itself as protecting the 'freedom' of individual gun owners, it's actually working to protect the freedom of the gun industry to manufacture and sell virtually any weapon or accessory." The NRA's top corporate benefactor is MidwayUSA, the "Official Sponsor of the NRA Annual Meeting and Exhibits...” being held in Pittsburgh, PA, later this month. MidwayUSA sells ammunition, high-capacity ammunition magazines, and other shooting accessories and has contributed between five and 10 million dollars to the NRA via its NRA Round-Up Program (which rounds up customer purchases to the nearest dollar with the difference going to the NRA) and other contributions. One Pittsburgh resident who apparently took part in the NRA’s Round-Up Program through MidwayUSA was concealed carry permit holder George Sodini, who in August 2009 opened fire at an LA Fitness Center in Collier, PA, killing three women and wounding nine others before turning the gun on himself and taking his own life. A copy of the e-mail receipt sent to Sodini from MidwayUSA for his purchase of 9mm and .45 ammunition includes a donation of 74 cents from the mass shooter to the NRA via the Round-Up Program. The study concludes, "The mutually dependent nature of the National Rifle Association and the gun industry explains the NRA’s unwillingness to compromise on even the most limited controls over firearms or related products (such as restrictions on high-capacity ammunition magazines)....The NRA claims that its positions are driven solely by a concern for the interests of gun owners, never mentioning its own financial stake in protecting the profits of its gun industry patrons. At the 2009 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told a cheering crowd that 'the guys with the guns make the rules.' The information contained in this report raises the question as to what degree it is the guys who make the guns who make the rules."

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      You're even stupider than I thought.

      Not possible#oblivious

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      We know you will captain oblivious

      see you around, no doubt  ;)

      Like a Swiss watch

      You're even stupider than I thought.

      Not possible#oblivious

      lol . . easy Junior . . .  you look up that word yet?  Man, you're cracking me up"anonymity" . . .  oh no . . its the other word . . . well, look 'em both uplol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Yep and it had your DUI picture next to the definition ………

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Yep and it had your DUI picture next to the definition .........

      hmmm . . . a picture?  ironicOlaf, like I said . . .monkey's dead, shows over . . .  you're wasting your time . . .but hey . . .  who am I to stop your from you child-like fun. . . . . hmm . .

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      the media blitz continues:http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/17/opinion/bloomberg-watts-gun-control-initiative/index.html?hpt=hp_t2no direct response from the NRA yet?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      a little help from his friends:R.E.M. HQ        ?  @remhq Americans overwhelmingly support stronger gun laws; @Everytown is their voice. WATCH their new PSA: http://every.tw/stopthisBette Midler        ?  @BetteMidler  Follow This is so disturbing. More than 2 million American kids live in a home where this could happen: http://every.tw/stopthis  via @EverytownThe Roots        ?  @theroots  Follow Every parent should see this before letting their kids play hide and seek - via @everytown : http://every.tw/Stopthis  http://fb.me/2DiaTsJ1POMAR EPPS        ?  @omarepps  Follow More than 2 million American kids live in a home where this could happen! http://every.tw/stopthis S/O @Everytown  #WeAreEverytownJulianne Moore        ?  @_juliannemoore  Follow New org @Everytown is taking on gun safety. WATCH their new PSA: http://every.tw/stopthis  #WeAreEverytownChris Cornell        ?  @chriscornell  Follow What does responsible gun ownership mean? Every parent should see this: http://every.tw/Stopthis  via @Everytown #WeAreEverytown

      That's a very nice Beretta 92FS in that commercial.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Yep and it had your DUI picture next to the definition .........

      shows over . . . 

      apparently not captain oblivious

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Yep and it had your DUI picture next to the definition .........

      shows over . . . 

      apparently not captain oblivious

      oh it is Junior, I don't mean responding to you . . . which makes your repeated use of the word "oblivious" that much more entertaining . . .lol Your version of the show . . . . child-like nonsense , no doubt befitting of your stature . . . well, I don't control that  . . .you do, so carry on Junior .. . . just call me "oblivious" again, that one makes me laughhey, are you really an "excellent" reader?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      you and your projecting are the show captain oblivious

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      you and your projecting are the show captain oblivious

      Weak sauce Junior. I thought you were an excellent reader?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      “He was speaking to you, as much as any regular NRA member.”If he's speaking to me, he's doing it through you. Are you his prophet, then? Within the last three years, I've received news of the NRA from but a solitary source - you.Ironic, no?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      "He was speaking to you, as much as any regular NRA member."If he's speaking to me, he's doing it through you. Are you his prophet, then? Within the last three years, I've received news of the NRA from but a solitary source - you.Ironic, no?

      So the message is only meant for you if received? Um...okay?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 139

      Hey Vin….move to N.Y. you fit that shoe…….I just mailed a check to the NRA to fight for my gun rights…………..We’re more powerful than your fantasy….Have a nice day, and get on down there and get your nails done………

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Hey Vin....move to N.Y. you fit that shoe.......I just mailed a check to the NRA to fight for my gun rights..............We're more powerful than your fantasy....Have a nice day, and get on down there and get your nails done.........

      You know what they say about assumptions

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 139

      That’s a gay comment……..I understand and am tolerant…….

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 139

      Back to the point….I don’t have a concern with background checks…….Bloomberg is a fanatic with millions to waste on a losing agenda….Gun owners in this country will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights……..

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Back to the point....I don't have a concern with background checks.......Bloomberg is a fanatic with millions to waste on a losing agenda....Gun owners in this country will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights........

      A background check is not a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 139

      Back to the point....I don't have a concern with background checks.......Bloomberg is a fanatic with millions to waste on a losing agenda....Gun owners in this country will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights........

      A background check is not a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

      I just said that ..........you Ron Burgandy looking fluck.....

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Back to the point....I don't have a concern with background checks.......Bloomberg is a fanatic with millions to waste on a losing agenda....Gun owners in this country will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights........

      A background check is not a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

      I just said that ..........you Ron Burgandy looking fluck.....

      peanut butter boy reads below a 3rd grade level so cut him some slack#projection

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Back to the point....I don't have a concern with background checks.......Bloomberg is a fanatic with millions to waste on a losing agenda....Gun owners in this country will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights........

      A background check is not a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

      I just said that ..........you Ron Burgandy looking fluck.....

      How can he have a losing agenda if his agenda is background check and then why would he lose at the hands of gun owners who aren't going to give up there 2nd amendment rights....when background checks are not prohibited by the 2nd Amendment anyway?Lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Back to the point....I don't have a concern with background checks.......Bloomberg is a fanatic with millions to waste on a losing agenda....Gun owners in this country will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights........

      A background check is not a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

      I just said that ..........you Ron Burgandy looking fluck.....

      peanut butter boy reads below a 3rd grade level so cut him some slack#projection

      Maybe you could teach me Junior? Could you do that?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      I could, but I won’t ……..

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      I could, but I won't ........

      Well, that's all that matters ... That you could. That's nice.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 139

      Back to the point....I don't have a concern with background checks.......Bloomberg is a fanatic with millions to waste on a losing agenda....Gun owners in this country will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights........

      A background check is not a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

      I just said that ..........you Ron Burgandy looking fluck.....

      How can he have a losing agenda if his agenda is background check and then why would he lose at the hands of gun owners who aren't going to give up there 2nd amendment rights....when background checks are not prohibited by the 2nd Amendment anyway?Lol

      Bloomberg is not about background  checks, he's about regristration and confiscation....He wants a disarmed America........

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Back to the point....I don't have a concern with background checks.......Bloomberg is a fanatic with millions to waste on a losing agenda....Gun owners in this country will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights........

      A background check is not a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

      I just said that ..........you Ron Burgandy looking fluck.....

      How can he have a losing agenda if his agenda is background check and then why would he lose at the hands of gun owners who aren't going to give up there 2nd amendment rights....when background checks are not prohibited by the 2nd Amendment anyway?Lol

      Bloomberg is not about background  checks, he's about regristration and confiscation....He wants a disarmed America........

      I have no doubt you believe that and that might even be his personal goal but this new organization is focused on universal background checks, a concept that is only at odds with the interests of gun maker and seller profits.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

        “universal background checks, a concept that is only at odds with the interests of gun maker and seller profits.”Lie after lie after lie.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

        "universal background checks, a concept that is only at odds with the interests of gun maker and seller profits."Lie after lie after lie.

      What other interest are hurt by universal background checks?To sell a lot of new guns you need a small market of customers to be able to sell old guns. The easier is to sell old guns, the easier it is to buy new guns. See the private seller loophole.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Here’s Wayne’s current list:http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/02/the_nra_s_pathetic_excuses_for_opposing_universal_background_checks.htmlWayne was for them ... A while back ...seems he found religion, gun maker religion.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

        "universal background checks, a concept that is only at odds with the interests of gun maker and seller profits."Lie after lie after lie.

      It's not him, it's everyone else

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      He's one of those forty percenters.http://www.factcheck.org/2013/03/guns-acquired-without-background-checks

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      He's one of those forty percenters.http://www.factcheck.org/2013/03/guns-acquired-without-background-checks

      Non-sequitur

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

        "universal background checks, a concept that is only at odds with the interests of gun maker and seller profits."Lie after lie after lie.

      It's not him, it's everyone else

      Poor Junior, still looking for his "anonymous" pound of flesh. Junior, tell me if I am wrong. You're a short guy, not much taller than a teenage kid? Bald too?is that close?Btw, you're trying too hard when you're using Buggsy's line at an inappropriate time, no less

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      Non-sequitur?http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jul/25/michael-bloomberg/mayor-michael-bloomberg-says-40-percent-guns-are-s/

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Non-sequitur?http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jul/25/michael-bloomberg/mayor-michael-bloomberg-says-40-percent-guns-are-s/

      Look back at my comment.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Illuminator, what is the point you are trying to make with that politic facts piece that you think relates to my comment you called a lie?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

        "universal background checks, a concept that is only at odds with the interests of gun maker and seller profits."Lie after lie after lie.

      It's not him, it's everyone else

      Poor Junior, still looking for his "anonymous" pound of flesh. Junior, tell me if I am wrong. You're a short guy, not much taller than a teenage kid? Bald too?is that close?Btw, you're trying too hard when you're using Buggsy's line at an inappropriate time, no less

      Hmmm

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      That forty percent platitude is a reliable indicator that the person trying to sell you their philosophy is willing to lie to do it. A theory you have confirmed repeatedly.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Back to the point....I don't have a concern with background checks.......Bloomberg is a fanatic with millions to waste on a losing agenda....Gun owners in this country will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights........

      Well said.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      That forty percent platitude is a reliable indicator that the person trying to sell you their philosophy is willing to lie to do it. A theory you have confirmed repeatedly.

      1. My comment was about the interests harmed by universal background checks2. Did you actually read the link? It doesn't say the number is not true, it's says it's old ... Along with several current "experts" saying it could be more and there's no dispute that there are a lot of private sales?So, again, what was the point? Btw, Olaf says he can teach reading. I am inclined to agree, but who knows :-). Anyway, just in case you need a little help.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3341

      Man, I never come to the Cove

      1) I never come down to the Cove.  This was just a trip out of boredom

      Is it any wonder that this lying sack of crap now practically posts more than everyone else here combined?And it's clearly a coincidence that the decline in participation on this board has coincided with the good Counselor's decision to make his life revolve around the "downstairs" Pirates Cove.  Complete coincidence.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Man, I never come to the Cove

      1) I never come down to the Cove.  This was just a trip out of boredom

      Is it any wonder that this lying sack of crap now practically posts more than everyone else here combined?And it's clearly a coincidence that the decline in participation on this board has coincided with the good Counselor's decision to make his life revolve around the "downstairs" Pirates Cove.  Complete coincidence.

      Buggsy you lack creativity. What line of work you in?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      Lol. Anybody remember his diatribe about how this place was for losers that never went outside? And now, as stated, his day revolves around it. Couldn’t stop posting here if his life depended on it.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      I’m still trying to figure out what Vin thinks is reasonable. Is it just universal background checks? And if so, I wish he/she would elaborate. Is he/she for a bans on certain types of firearms? And if so, on what kinds and why? Just a few of many questions I have.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      Vin is reluctant to state his actual stance, for then he would be required to defend it. His crusade is more about making himself the center of attention.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Vin is reluctant to state his actual stance, for then he would be required to defend it. His crusade is more about making himself the center of attention.

      I'm more than happy to argue my stance.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Vin is reluctant to state his actual stance, for then he would be required to defend it. His crusade is more about making himself the center of attention.

      This

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      That’s easy. Done it many times. One second

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

        "universal background checks, a concept that is only at odds with the interests of gun maker and seller profits."Lie after lie after lie.

      It's not him, it's everyone else

      Poor Junior, still looking for his "anonymous" pound of flesh. Junior, tell me if I am wrong. You're a short guy, not much taller than a teenage kid? Bald too?is that close?Btw, you're trying too hard when you're using Buggsy's line at an inappropriate time, no less

      Wouldn't you like to know peanut butter boy. Now my turn, you were the last one picked in all the PE games, never was invited to hang out with the "cool" kids, and wasn't hugged enough by your parents as a child.  Consequently you have developed incredible low self esteem which leads to your alcoholism, your overwhelming need for attention even negative, not having a life outside the fantasy world you create online and in your delusional head.And no, it was used perfectly.#projection 

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      True universal background checks and waiting periods, no loopholesRestricted access to assault rifles (broad definition) - very little functional utility, high impactRestricted access to high capacity magazinesStrict liability (civil) for guns Much more money to mental health, but also much lower standard than "adjudicated" to block purchaseNo SYG except on own property, restrict CWPLicensing (ed and safety)Wayne' School & Mall Security Plan -  funded by graduated tax on guns and bulletsMinimum liability ins for gun owner

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

        "universal background checks, a concept that is only at odds with the interests of gun maker and seller profits."Lie after lie after lie.

      It's not him, it's everyone else

      Poor Junior, still looking for his "anonymous" pound of flesh. Junior, tell me if I am wrong. You're a short guy, not much taller than a teenage kid? Bald too?is that close?Btw, you're trying too hard when you're using Buggsy's line at an inappropriate time, no less

      Wouldn't you like to know

      Oops.....I guess that means I ...um ... Guessed right!! Yeah!!

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      True universal background checks and waiting periods, no loopholes.I'm okay with universal background checks and waiting periods, unless you already possess an active and valid CWP. Restricted access to assault rifles (broad definition) - very little functional utility, high impactI'd like to hear your definition of an "assault rifle". I'd also like to hear your opinion as to why there should be restricted access and what it would entail. If "very little functional utility" is your reason, then clearly you know very little about any rifles. Restricted access to high capacity magazinesWhy? And what's your definition of high capacity? What's your definition of "restricted" access? Are you referring simply to long rifles or are you including sidearms as well?Strict liability (civil) for guns I agree somewhat. However, if someone breaks into my home and I need to use deadly force; should I be open to more civil punishment?Much more money to mental health, but also much lower standard than "adjudicated" to block purchaseI agree with you. No SYG except on own property, restrict CWPSYG should be allowed outside of your homes if it's the ONLY option. I'm assuming you don't have a CWP and don't understand the lengthy, costly, and tedious procedure it is to acquire one. Restrict CWP? Please explain how?Licensing (ed and safety)Education and safety courses before purchase, I am all for it. Any sort of registration of firearms or national database? Hell fugging no!Wayne' School & Mall Security Plan -  funded by graduated tax on guns and bulletsIncrease the tax on guns and bullets? No.Hell no. You want to fund a security program? Then have Bloomberg pay for it. Or better yet, cut funding for welfare, EBT, food stamps, govt. assistance, etc.Minimum liability ins for gun ownerMaybe.

      That's just me. But, you left a lot of gray area there.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Thanks for the response. I will comment more later

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Thanks for the response. I will comment more later

      Glad to hear it. You made your points, but didn't really elaborate on them. I'm anxious to hear.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Common Ground:True universal background checks and waiting periods, no loopholes.I'm okay with universal background checks and waiting periods, unless you already possess an active and valid CWP. Much more money to mental health, but also much lower standard than "adjudicated" to block purchaseI agree with you. Licensing (ed and safety)Education and safety courses before purchase, I am all for it. Any sort of registration of firearms or national database? Hell fugging no!I dont get the fear over registration. If the government wanted to disarm or kill you, its not a database that will help them, its a tank or an F-16, but I dont think its necessary any wayPossible Common Ground:Strict liability (civil) for guns I agree somewhat. However, if someone breaks into my home and I need to use deadly force; should I be open to more civil punishment?EXPLANATION: You would not be open to civil or criminal punishment in that case due to Castle Doctrine, but I was revferring to civil negligence, so someone is hurt with your gun no need to prove you were negligent. same standard that applies for any deadly items. Again, only talking about CIVIL liability (i.e., money)Minimum liability ins for gun ownerMaybe. see right above, you'll want the insurance, its cheap.More info needed:Restricted access to assault rifles (broad definition) - very little functional utility, high impactI'd like to hear your definition of an "assault rifle". I'd also like to hear your opinion as to why there should be restricted access and what it would entail. If "very little functional utility" is your reason, then clearly you know very little about any rifles. I left out a word. I meant to say assault rifles have very little SOCIAL utility, meaning they add very little to society. They are essentially a sporting luxury item for a very small minority.  As such they are not afforded any unique protection under the law.  (Contrast the to a car, A car is dangerous BUT a car also has a huge social utility because it is a primary mode of necessary transportation.)  Assault rifles are also VERY deadly. They are not used often, but when they are they are very deadly, so deadly that they are now the weapon of choice for mass murderers.  Very low social utility + high capacity to kill = restrict tightly.  Allow people to use the for sporting activities but only in a controlled environment. I would say as an alternative to re-instituting the past ban, allow their use but only in regulated gun clubs, where the weapons are also stored/maintained. Blame crazy people, movies, the news and video games, but if someone wants to kill a lot of humans, the "assault rifle" is the weapon of choice, and the weapons does not have any socially redeeming value (such as a car). Restricted access to high capacity magazinesWhy? And what's your definition of high capacity? What's your definition of "restricted" access? Are you referring simply to long rifles or are you including sidearms as well?On high capacity magazines and "assault rifles," you can start the negotiations with your definition/parameters.  I said "broad definition" for assault rifles because I mean all "military-style rifles, sold to be like military rifles, with the purpose of the weapon being to kill any living things at one time.  Whether that is all "AR" style weapons, soeone else can decide, but the point is to highly regulate that class of weapons that people have used and continue to use to kill any people, particularly in densely packed area (schools, movie theaters etc. The last assault weapons ban only touched a fraction of the weapons, so I mean boarder than that, by far.  But, for the purposes of making the list there are surely weapons that both sides could agree on - guns that obviously fit the bill -- start there and expand out.On magazines, I have read people taking about 10 rounds or more, but agin start with OBVIOUS high capacity magazines on assault rifles and work backwards.  Just as with assault rifles, these would be restricted access. for use at regulated ranges etc.Strong Disagreement:Wayne' School & Mall Security Plan -  funded by graduated tax on guns and bulletsIncrease the tax on guns and bullets? No.Hell no. You want to fund a security program? Then have Bloomberg pay for it. Or better yet, cut funding for welfare, EBT, food stamps, govt. assistance, etc.Haha, I included this one because you guys - gun people -- cant have it both ways.  Prior to Sandy Hook NRA Wayne was all for universal background checks, after he was not. His "solution" was to put ared guards at schools because, as the NRA mantra goes, "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy . .  with a gun"  Well, if the NRA refuses to support universal background checks (and they do) then the only solution is to take NRA Wayne up on his "solution."  The problem is the funding though . .  and why should a non gun owner pay for security over just doing away with the guns?  The perfect solution is to pay for the security by taxing guns and bullets.  The Wayne Tax!!Thanks again. I know we disagree, but that's fine.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

        "universal background checks, a concept that is only at odds with the interests of gun maker and seller profits."Lie after lie after lie.

      It's not him, it's everyone else

      Poor Junior, still looking for his "anonymous" pound of flesh. Junior, tell me if I am wrong. You're a short guy, not much taller than a teenage kid? Bald too?is that close?Btw, you're trying too hard when you're using Buggsy's line at an inappropriate time, no less

      Wouldn't you like to know

      Oops.....I guess that means I ...um ... Guessed right!! Yeah!!

      you missed slightly over weight, but we know I hit the nail on the head.#obliviousvillageidiot

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      So let me ask you this Vin, considering I hold a CWP, a class 3 weapons license, am a law abiding citizen, and have a large amount of firearms that are safely stored; why should I be subjected to any sort of restrictions?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      So let me ask you this Vin, considering I hold a CWP, a class 3 weapons license, am a law abiding citizen, and have a large amount of firearms that are safely stored; why should I be subjected to any sort of restrictions?

      1. You wouldn't face restrictions, your weapons would (although your qualifications would make them lesser than most)2. Columbine, Sandy Hook, Colorado Theater, Wiregrass Theater (a CWP former law enforcement guy) and roughly 30,000 gun deaths a year3, your brothers in arms who are not a professional

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      4. An overreaching lobby that is partially responsible for 1-3 above. (As I have been posting for months, legislation is almost always overreaction, but the refusal to agree to any restrictions makes complaining pointless)Btw, if I am a race car driver with a spotless driving record, I am still subject to driving restrictions, right?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      We will just have to agree to disagree. As I said earlier, I believe there should be universal background checks and that loopholes should be closed in regards to private sellers and gun shows. An assault rifle ban, magazine restrictions, confiscation, etc. is not the answer. And it simply punishes the law abiding citizens. Vin, do you even own any firearms? Have you ever fired one?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      4. An overreaching lobby that is partially responsible for 1-3 above. (As I have been posting for months, legislation is almost always overreaction, but the refusal to agree to any restrictions makes complaining pointless)Btw, if I am a race car driver with a spotless driving record, I am still subject to driving restrictions, right?

      That's ridiculous. And I agree that legislation can be an overreaction, but both sides are guilty in not being able to compromise. But, I guess because "my side" won't agree to certain bans or restrictions, complaining is pointless.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      We will just have to agree to disagree. As I said earlier, I believe there should be universal background checks and that loopholes should be closed in regards to private sellers and gun shows. An assault rifle ban, magazine restrictions, confiscation, etc. is not the answer. And it simply punishes the law abiding citizens. Vin, do you even own any firearms? Have you ever fired one?

      I do. I actually grew up shooting competition pistols (because of an Uncle on the Marine Corp pistol team) and shooting various rifles. I am fine with agreeing to disagree. "Law abiding citizens" have to deal with evolving laws and will no doubt be "victims" of casting their lots with a gun maker lobby. Thanks for the convo.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      4. An overreaching lobby that is partially responsible for 1-3 above. (As I have been posting for months, legislation is almost always overreaction, but the refusal to agree to any restrictions makes complaining pointless)Btw, if I am a race car driver with a spotless driving record, I am still subject to driving restrictions, right?

      That's ridiculous. And I agree that legislation can be an overreaction, but both sides are guilty in not being able to compromise. But, I guess because "my side" won't agree to certain bans or restrictions, complaining is pointless.

      How many gun owners in the US?300 million gunsThat is gross overreaching for profits at a cost of 30,000 lives a year (roughly)But just ignore that math and think about this: after Columbine, Wayne said he was for background checks at gun shows. After Sandy Hook, he said he was not. What changed? Nothing in the logic of universal background checks, that's for sure. Only "gun logic" says you can contain cows in a square field with a three-sided fence. What difference does it make that I have to submit to a background check at WalMart when I can just buy the gun online or from a private seller or by waking across the street from a gun show? It's profits and not the 2nd Am that leads to that absurd "logic"

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 11506

      Bloomberg is a modern day Nazi . My honest opinion ….

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Bloomberg is a modern day Nazi . My honest opinion ....

      I am not a fan even if I agree with him on this issue

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1875

      Bloomberg is a modern day Nazi . My honest opinion ....

      Hard to believe his goals now, having listened to his prior goals which surely seemed my more drastic. 

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Bloomberg is a modern day Nazi . My honest opinion ....

      Hard to believe his goals now, having listened to his prior goals which surely seemed my more drastic.

      Fearmonger.....er ;)

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      Bloomberg is a modern day Nazi . My honest opinion ....

      I'd bet Durango wouldn't even look at that as an insult...I mean, we all know that the Holocaust never happened, right?http://expeltheparasite.com/2013/10/28/the-holocaust-hoax-it-never-happened/

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      Durango wins.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

      lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

      lol

      Illuminati/NWO wins.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1875

      Only way to ‘win’ on this board is to not play.  The Red X is pretty handy as well.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 11506

      Red x is for jabronis .

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3341

      Only way to 'win' on this board is to not play. 

      QFT

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      https://www.momsdemandaction.org/We are thrilled to announce that Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Mayors Against Illegal Guns are joining forces to launch our most ambitious effort yet: Everytown for Gun Safety.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

      lol

      Olaf Berserker Junior mad? On Easter weekend? C'mon man ....

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      https://www.momsdemandaction.org/We are thrilled to announce that Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Mayors Against Illegal Guns are joining forces to launch our most ambitious effort yet: Everytown for Gun Safety.

      If it's for universal background checks, more mental healthcare, and closing of certain loopholes; then that's fine and dandy. Restrictions of magazines capacity and AR-style rifles is not.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 11506

      I agree Donkey.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      https://www.momsdemandaction.org/We are thrilled to announce that Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Mayors Against Illegal Guns are joining forces to launch our most ambitious effort yet: Everytown for Gun Safety.

      If it's for universal background checks, more mental healthcare, and closing of certain loopholes; then that's fine and dandy. Restrictions of magazines capacity and AR-style rifles is not.

      I understand the point, but if one accepts as a premise that a) there will be more Sandy Hook-style mass murders and b) high capacity magazines and AR-style rifles are the weapon of choice for those mass murders THEN ... at some point it becomes your hobby versus mass murder .... and your hobby should give way, right?that was my earlier point about social utility,  Basically, AR-style rifles are a sporting endeavor for a small number of people, and little more.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      https://www.momsdemandaction.org/We are thrilled to announce that Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Mayors Against Illegal Guns are joining forces to launch our most ambitious effort yet: Everytown for Gun Safety.

      If it's for universal background checks, more mental healthcare, and closing of certain loopholes; then that's fine and dandy. Restrictions of magazines capacity and AR-style rifles is not.

      I understand the point, but if one accepts as a premise that a) there will be more Sandy Hook-style mass murders and b) high capacity magazines and AR-style rifles are the weapon of choice for those mass murders THEN ... at some point it becomes your hobby versus mass murder .... and your hobby should give way, right?that was my earlier point about social utility,  Basically, AR-style rifles are a sporting endeavor for a small number of people, and little more.

      In these scenarios of school shootings, shotguns would be far more deadly than AR platform rifles. And even if we moved to ban AR's and ban certain magazines, it only takes a mere second or two in order to interchange magazines and reload. Multiple pistols, revolvers, etc. Most gun control advocates look at AR platform rifles and think they're fully automatic, extremely accurate, and fire 100's of rounds per minute. They look scary because they think this is what our military uses and it's what they see in the movies. Most of the ones I know or whom I've encountered don't know a single thing about firearms, but are jumping on the bandwagon because it's the trendy thing to do. But, what the hell? Let's ban all guns. It's not as if someone could use a pressure cooker for a bomb, or fly a commercial airliner into a building. We should be safe.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      https://www.momsdemandaction.org/We are thrilled to announce that Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Mayors Against Illegal Guns are joining forces to launch our most ambitious effort yet: Everytown for Gun Safety.

      If it's for universal background checks, more mental healthcare, and closing of certain loopholes; then that's fine and dandy. Restrictions of magazines capacity and AR-style rifles is not.

      I understand the point, but if one accepts as a premise that a) there will be more Sandy Hook-style mass murders and b) high capacity magazines and AR-style rifles are the weapon of choice for those mass murders THEN ... at some point it becomes your hobby versus mass murder .... and your hobby should give way, right?that was my earlier point about social utility,  Basically, AR-style rifles are a sporting endeavor for a small number of people, and little more.

      In these scenarios of school shootings, shotguns would be far more deadly than AR platform rifles.

      and yet . . .  they choose AR-style rifles, right? 

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      https://www.momsdemandaction.org/We are thrilled to announce that Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Mayors Against Illegal Guns are joining forces to launch our most ambitious effort yet: Everytown for Gun Safety.

      If it's for universal background checks, more mental healthcare, and closing of certain loopholes; then that's fine and dandy. Restrictions of magazines capacity and AR-style rifles is not.

      I understand the point, but if one accepts as a premise that a) there will be more Sandy Hook-style mass murders and b) high capacity magazines and AR-style rifles are the weapon of choice for those mass murders THEN ... at some point it becomes your hobby versus mass murder .... and your hobby should give way, right?that was my earlier point about social utility,  Basically, AR-style rifles are a sporting endeavor for a small number of people, and little more.

      In these scenarios of school shootings, shotguns would be far more deadly than AR platform rifles.

      and yet . . .  they choose AR-style rifles, right?

      Really? Of all the mass shooting from 1982-2012 (this also included 5 events in 2013) and the 143 guns that were used, 71 of them were semi-automatic HANDGUNS. 28 were rifles in general, including bolt action and AR platforms, 23 were revolvers, and 21 were shotguns.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      https://www.momsdemandaction.org/We are thrilled to announce that Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Mayors Against Illegal Guns are joining forces to launch our most ambitious effort yet: Everytown for Gun Safety.

      If it's for universal background checks, more mental healthcare, and closing of certain loopholes; then that's fine and dandy. Restrictions of magazines capacity and AR-style rifles is not.

      I understand the point, but if one accepts as a premise that a) there will be more Sandy Hook-style mass murders and b) high capacity magazines and AR-style rifles are the weapon of choice for those mass murders THEN ... at some point it becomes your hobby versus mass murder .... and your hobby should give way, right?that was my earlier point about social utility,  Basically, AR-style rifles are a sporting endeavor for a small number of people, and little more.

      In these scenarios of school shootings, shotguns would be far more deadly than AR platform rifles.

      and yet . . .  they choose AR-style rifles, right?

      Really? Of all the mass shooting from 1982-2012 (this also included 5 events in 2013) and the 143 guns that were used, 71 of them were semi-automatic HANDGUNS. 28 were rifles in general, including bolt action and AR platforms, 23 were revolvers, and 21 were shotguns.

      perception versus reality perhaps but perhaps also why high capacity magazines are referenced:new_guns_630_0228_0.pngin any event,  perceptions always carries the day and that is why we have already had an assault weapons ban.  The point though is to reduce the ability of a human to kill many humans at once. "self defense" and "mass murder" are not the same things and dont require the same weapons . . .  so where there is a "self-defense" justification for a handgun . .  . there is less justification for an assault rifle that can kill many people at once .  . in fact, that is sort of designed for just that . . . hence the "military" connection

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Make up your mind. First, you say that the AR is the weapon of choice and now you’re saying it’s a perception?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      in any event, perceptions always carries the day and that is why we have already had an assault weapons ban.  The point though is to reduce the ability of a human to kill many humans at once. "self defense" and "mass murder" are not the same things and dont require the same weapons . . .  so where there is a "self-defense" justification for a handgun . .  . there is less justification for an assault rifle that can kill many people at once .  . in fact, that is sort of designed for just that . . . hence the "military" connection

      Really? Virginia Tech massacre. 33 dead and countless more injured. What kind of assault rifle did he use again? I don't remember.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Make up your mind. First, you say that the AR is the weapon of choice and now you're saying it's a perception?

      well, you went back to 1982 so so did I.if memory serves, Sandy Hook, Santa Monica, the kid that walked into the Atlanta school, and the Colorado theater shooting were all AR style rifles.  AR style rifles are glamorized as mass killing machines, in order to sell them, but also in video games . . they are the weapon that these killers seem to chose if available.  In fact, the Santa Monica killer went so far as to build one . . . it goes with the whole body armor look, right?Assault rifles and high-capacity clips are for killing a lot of people at once.  The Colorado theater killer didn't choose an assault rifle randomly . .  it held a 100 round drum clip, right? Same thing with the Santa Monica guy  and the Sandy Hook kid, who had several guns but specifically chose the AR-style gun. Now think about this: the most compelling argument for guns in society is defense of self and property.  See the disconnect?  One is not often defending one's self or property against a marauding gang, right?  It's usually one person -- often known to the victim . . . .so its tough to argue that you need a 100 round drum clip to protect your tv, right?The "defense of self and property" argument loses credibility when you have gun people refuse controls on mass killing weapons and accessories like 100 round drum clips especially when those items only serve a hobby interest.  . especi

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Make up your mind. First, you say that the AR is the weapon of choice and now you're saying it's a perception?

      well, you went back to 1982 so so did I.if memory serves, Sandy Hook, Santa Monica, the kid that walked into the Atlanta school, and the Colorado theater shooting were all AR style rifles.  AR style rifles are glamorized as mass killing machines, in order to sell them, but also in video games . . they are the weapon that these killers seem to chose if available.  In fact, the Santa Monica killer went so far as to build one . . . it goes with the whole body armor look, right?Assault rifles and high-capacity clips are for killing a lot of people at once.  The Colorado theater killer didn't choose an assault rifle randomly . .  it held a 100 round drum clip, right? Same thing with the Santa Monica guy  and the Sandy Hook kid, who had several guns but specifically chose the AR-style gun. Now think about this: the most compelling argument for guns in society is defense of self and property.  See the disconnect?  One is not often defending one's self or property against a marauding gang, right?  It's usually one person -- often known to the victim . . . .so its tough to argue that you need a 100 round drum clip to protect your tv, right?The "defense of self and property" argument loses credibility when you have gun people refuse controls on mass killing weapons and accessories like 100 round drum clips especially when those items only serve a hobby interest.  . especi

      I understand. But again, you stated that "the AR was the weapon of choice". Facts say that you're wrong. You now claim that's it's simply perception. So according to you, me saying "Well, I know that gun control advocates are really trying to take my guns" is legit because that's the perception I come away with. But, I'm sure these law-abiding citizens who committed these heinous acts would have simply gave up and never tried. All because of bans and restrictions. I mean, it's worked so well for drugs and other illegal activities.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      in any event, perceptions always carries the day and that is why we have already had an assault weapons ban.  The point though is to reduce the ability of a human to kill many humans at once. "self defense" and "mass murder" are not the same things and dont require the same weapons . . .  so where there is a "self-defense" justification for a handgun . .  . there is less justification for an assault rifle that can kill many people at once .  . in fact, that is sort of designed for just that . . . hence the "military" connection

      Really? Virginia Tech massacre. 33 dead and countless more injured. What kind of assault rifle did he use again? I don't remember.

      And since you probably missed this one. The shooter used 2 handguns. A .22 and 9mm. Those are 2 of the smallest caliber pistols manufactured today. You know, common "home self-defense" weapons. But, wait...they can't be since "mass murder" requires a different weapon.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Make up your mind. First, you say that the AR is the weapon of choice and now you're saying it's a perception?

      well, you went back to 1982 so so did I.if memory serves, Sandy Hook, Santa Monica, the kid that walked into the Atlanta school, and the Colorado theater shooting were all AR style rifles.  AR style rifles are glamorized as mass killing machines, in order to sell them, but also in video games . . they are the weapon that these killers seem to chose if available.  In fact, the Santa Monica killer went so far as to build one . . . it goes with the whole body armor look, right?Assault rifles and high-capacity clips are for killing a lot of people at once.  The Colorado theater killer didn't choose an assault rifle randomly . .  it held a 100 round drum clip, right? Same thing with the Santa Monica guy  and the Sandy Hook kid, who had several guns but specifically chose the AR-style gun. Now think about this: the most compelling argument for guns in society is defense of self and property.  See the disconnect?  One is not often defending one's self or property against a marauding gang, right?  It's usually one person -- often known to the victim . . . .so its tough to argue that you need a 100 round drum clip to protect your tv, right?The "defense of self and property" argument loses credibility when you have gun people refuse controls on mass killing weapons and accessories like 100 round drum clips especially when those items only serve a hobby interest.  . especi

      I understand. But again, you stated that "the AR was the weapon of choice". Facts say that you're wrong. You now claim that's it's simply perception. So according to you, me saying "Well, I know that gun control advocates are really trying to take my guns" is legit because that's the perception I come away with. But, I'm sure these law-abiding citizens who committed these heinous acts would have simply gave up and never tried. All because of bans and restrictions. I mean, it's worked so well for drugs and other illegal activities.

      I didnt say it was just perception. I said you can say that if you want but there is a reason -- and I cited the Colorado shooter as a specific example -- that mass murderers seem to choose assault weapons and that reason is the ability to fire a lot of bullets.  Can you attach a 100 round drum to  shotgun?Btw, you're now switching arguments (bans/restrictions will not work) before even address the fact that assault weapons and high capacity magazines are NOT necessary for defense of person and property . . . why is that? do you agree?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      in any event, perceptions always carries the day and that is why we have already had an assault weapons ban.  The point though is to reduce the ability of a human to kill many humans at once. "self defense" and "mass murder" are not the same things and dont require the same weapons . . .  so where there is a "self-defense" justification for a handgun . .  . there is less justification for an assault rifle that can kill many people at once .  . in fact, that is sort of designed for just that . . . hence the "military" connection

      Really? Virginia Tech massacre. 33 dead and countless more injured. What kind of assault rifle did he use again? I don't remember.

      And since you probably missed this one. The shooter used 2 handguns. A .22 and 9mm. Those are 2 of the smallest caliber pistols manufactured today. You know, common "home self-defense" weapons. But, wait...they can't be since "mass murder" requires a different weapon.

      see the part in bold? where did I say that mass murder requires a different weapon? DH -- as shocking as this might seem, the more bullets I have the better my chances of killing more people, particularly if I a a relative novice with a gun. its just common sense that I have a better chance of killing a lot of people with an AR and a 100 round drum clip then with a 6 shooter, right?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      in any event, perceptions always carries the day and that is why we have already had an assault weapons ban.  The point though is to reduce the ability of a human to kill many humans at once. "self defense" and "mass murder" are not the same things and dont require the same weapons . . .  so where there is a "self-defense" justification for a handgun . .  . there is less justification for an assault rifle that can kill many people at once .  . in fact, that is sort of designed for just that . . . hence the "military" connection

      Really? Virginia Tech massacre. 33 dead and countless more injured. What kind of assault rifle did he use again? I don't remember.

      And since you probably missed this one. The shooter used 2 handguns. A .22 and 9mm. Those are 2 of the smallest caliber pistols manufactured today. You know, common "home self-defense" weapons. But, wait...they can't be since "mass murder" requires a different weapon.

      see the part in bold? where did I say that mass murder requires a different weapon? DH -- as shocking as this might seem, the more bullets I have the better my chances of killing more people, particularly if I a a relative novice with a gun. its just common sense that I have a better chance of killing a lot of people with an AR and a 100 round drum clip then with a 6 shooter, right?

      Excuse me. I was doing a few things at once and misread your quote. But yes, while they don't require the same weapon, the V. Tech massacre shows that it can. One of the worst massacres in U.S. History, was carried out with the use of 2 commonly used handguns. Not assault rifles. Not with 100 round drums. Not with extended magazines. And this claimed the lives of more people than Sandy Hook. And I'm not switching arguments. You claimed that the AR was the choice of mass murderers. Then when I showed you proof that you were wrong, you claimed, "Well, that's the perception". And even now, you're backing off of that. Now you're saying that I refuse to address your "fact" that assault weapons and high capacity magazines are not necessary for self/home defense. You'd like me to address it? I will when you show me this "fact" that they are not necessary.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      DH, two things:1. just because a person can kill many people with 2 handguns does NOT mean its not OBVIOUSLY easier to do so with an assault rifle with a 100 round drum clip.  A;so, a restriction does NOT have to be a perfect solution to be worthwhile, particularly when we are talking about items with as low a social utility as assault rifles and 100 round drum clips2. why do you think assault weapons and high capacity magazines are necessary for self/home defense?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      DH, two things:1. just because a person can kill many people with 2 handguns does NOT mean its not OBVIOUSLY easier to do so with an assault rifle with a 100 round drum clip.  A;so, a restriction does NOT have to be a perfect solution to be worthwhile, particularly when we are talking about items with as low a social utility as assault rifles and 100 round drum clips2. why do you think assault weapons and high capacity magazines are necessary for self/home defense?

      VBF,1. Of course it's easier. I'm not arguing that. But, since the "100 round drum clip" seems to be your main topic; you do realize that the V. Tech shooter killed nearly 3 times as many people than the Colorado movie theatre piece of sh*t. Almost 5 times the amount of people in the Lockheed Martin shooting. And almost 7 times as many people as that waste of space at Fairchild AFB. And as far as low social utility (something else you changed), that's simply your opinion. 2. Please show me a quote where I said this. I'm still waiting on your "FACT" that it's not necessary to have these items. But, since you're fishing...I own a certain amount of firearms and ammunition that would make some people think that I'm a "Doomsday Prepper". After a decade of serving and specializing, I think I've earned (and fought for) that right. I own a home on a fairly large piece of property. I have a large area to look after. I would estimate that 95% of my inventory is safely secured throughout my entire property. But, my 2 "home/property/self defense firearms are custom made HK-416's. Which I used in the last 2 years of my service. I actually own three. But, the 2 that I refer to are designed for CQ. Both are illegal to posses unless you have the proper licensing (because they're fully automatic). FACT IS, my opinion is different from yours. FACT IS, your opinion is different than mine. While YOU may deem it outlandish for me to guard my home, property, family, well-being with a rifle that is QUITE compatible for urban environments, I simply see that rifle as what suits me best. Now, I know that a Mossberg 500 or any type of Glock, Smith and Wesson, or Sig Sauer can do the trick; I prefer to have the extra ammunition capacity for the unknown. As I was trained, "I'd much rather have a fuck pile of condoms and not need 'em, than need a condom and not have a single, fucking one".

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      DH, two things:1. just because a person can kill many people with 2 handguns does NOT mean its not OBVIOUSLY easier to do so with an assault rifle with a 100 round drum clip.  A;so, a restriction does NOT have to be a perfect solution to be worthwhile, particularly when we are talking about items with as low a social utility as assault rifles and 100 round drum clips2. why do you think assault weapons and high capacity magazines are necessary for self/home defense?

      VBF,1. Of course it's easier. I'm not arguing that. But, since the "100 round drum clip" seems to be your main topic; you do realize that the V. Tech shooter killed nearly 3 times as many people than the Colorado movie theatre piece of sh*t. Almost 5 times the amount of people in the Lockheed Martin shooting. And almost 7 times as many people as that waste of space at Fairchild AFB. And as far as low social utility (something else you changed), that's simply your opinion. 2. Please show me a quote where I said this. I'm still waiting on your "FACT" that it's not necessary to have these items. But, since you're fishing...I own a certain amount of firearms and ammunition that would make some people think that I'm a "Doomsday Prepper". After a decade of serving and specializing, I think I've earned (and fought for) that right. I own a home on a fairly large piece of property. I have a large area to look after. I would estimate that 95% of my inventory is safely secured throughout my entire property. But, my 2 "home/property/self defense firearms are custom made HK-416's. Which I used in the last 2 years of my service. I actually own three. But, the 2 that I refer to are designed for CQ. Both are illegal to posses unless you have the proper licensing (because they're fully automatic). FACT IS, my opinion is different from yours. FACT IS, your opinion is different than mine. While YOU may deem it outlandish for me to guard my home, property, family, well-being with a rifle that is QUITE compatible for urban environments, I simply see that rifle as what suits me best. Now, I know that a Mossberg 500 or any type of Glock, Smith and Wesson, or Sig Sauer can do the trick; I prefer to have the extra ammunition capacity for the unknown. As I was trained, "I'd much rather have a **CENSORED** pile of condoms and not need 'em, than need a condom and not have a single, **CENSORED**ing one".

      Meaning that they are in safes, secured, and not as accessible as the ones used for home defense.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      DH, two things:1. just because a person can kill many people with 2 handguns does NOT mean its not OBVIOUSLY easier to do so with an assault rifle with a 100 round drum clip.  A;so, a restriction does NOT have to be a perfect solution to be worthwhile, particularly when we are talking about items with as low a social utility as assault rifles and 100 round drum clips2. why do you think assault weapons and high capacity magazines are necessary for self/home defense?

      VBF,1. Of course it's easier. I'm not arguing that. But, since the "100 round drum clip" seems to be your main topic; you do realize that the V. Tech shooter killed nearly 3 times as many people than the Colorado movie theatre piece of sh*t. Almost 5 times the amount of people in the Lockheed Martin shooting. And almost 7 times as many people as that waste of space at Fairchild AFB. And as far as low social utility (something else you changed), that's simply your opinion. 2. Please show me a quote where I said this. I'm still waiting on your "FACT" that it's not necessary to have these items. But, since you're fishing...I own a certain amount of firearms and ammunition that would make some people think that I'm a "Doomsday Prepper". After a decade of serving and specializing, I think I've earned (and fought for) that right. I own a home on a fairly large piece of property. I have a large area to look after. I would estimate that 95% of my inventory is safely secured throughout my entire property. But, my 2 "home/property/self defense firearms are custom made HK-416's. Which I used in the last 2 years of my service. I actually own three. But, the 2 that I refer to are designed for CQ. Both are illegal to posses unless you have the proper licensing (because they're fully automatic). FACT IS, my opinion is different from yours. FACT IS, your opinion is different than mine. While YOU may deem it outlandish for me to guard my home, property, family, well-being with a rifle that is QUITE compatible for urban environments, I simply see that rifle as what suits me best. Now, I know that a Mossberg 500 or any type of Glock, Smith and Wesson, or Sig Sauer can do the trick; I prefer to have the extra ammunition capacity for the unknown. As I was trained, "I'd much rather have a **CENSORED** pile of condoms and not need 'em, than need a condom and not have a single, **CENSORED**ing one".

      I did not say you said anything, I just asked you to explain why you seem to think that assault rifles and high-capacity clips are necessary for personal or property defense.  I cannot imagine a reasonably foreseeable event where I would need 100 rounds, but if you can just give me your best argument.  I understand your comment above and your point of view, but your comment "i simply see that rifle as what suits me best" really goes to my point, which is those weapons are really a hobby or a choice whereas one can make a compelling self-defense argument for a hand gun or a lower capacity rifle.on point #, I guess we agree based on the first sentence

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

      lol

      lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3341

      DonkeyHunter, a word of advice:wargames-quote-not-to-play_medium.jpg

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      DonkeyHunter, a word of advice:wargames-quote-not-to-play_medium.jpg

      Buggsy is intimidated by the prospect of someone disagreeing with him.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

      lol

      lol

      Olaf Berserker Jr is mad....and he wants everyone to know it damn it!!!Lol, I guess the "anonymous" stalking has lost it's luster Junior?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3341

      DonkeyHunter, a word of advice:wargames-quote-not-to-play_medium.jpg

      Buggsy is intimidated by the prospect of someone disagreeing with him.

      You hit this one on the head, Counselor.  I tiptoe all around this forum hoping nobody disagrees with me.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      DonkeyHunter, a word of advice:wargames-quote-not-to-play_medium.jpg

      LOL.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      I did not say you said anything, I just asked you to explain why you seem to think that assault rifles and high-capacity clips are necessary for personal or property defense.  I cannot imagine a reasonably foreseeable event where I would need 100 rounds, but if you can just give me your best argument.  I understand your comment above and your point of view, but your comment "i simply see that rifle as what suits me best" really goes to my point, which is those weapons are really a hobby or a choice whereas one can make a compelling self-defense argument for a hand gun or a lower capacity rifle.on point #, I guess we agree based on the first sentence

      Yes, you could make an argument that a handgun (the PROVEN and ACTUAL weapon of choice for mass murders) would be the ideal choice for home defense. Yes, you could make an argument that a lower capacity rifle (like a .22 caliber rifle similar to the one Adam Lanza used to kill his mother and gain access to the assault rifle used in the Sandy Hook shooting) would be ideal as well. As far as these weapons being a choice; they're all a choice. I assume that anyone who breaks onto my property or into my home is not alone. I will also assume that they are armed. I would prefer to deal with any and all threats at a comfortable distance. However, I would prefer a rifle that could be functional and effective at both long, medium, and close range. God forbid, this intruder is stupid enough to actually want to get involved in a gunfight; I want to make sure that I have as much ammunition that I could possibly have readily available to me. In survival situations, it can serve as personal/property defense, as well as an effective and accurate hunting weapon. Is that good enough for you(although I already know the answer)?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

      lol

      lol

      lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      I did not say you said anything, I just asked you to explain why you seem to think that assault rifles and high-capacity clips are necessary for personal or property defense.  I cannot imagine a reasonably foreseeable event where I would need 100 rounds, but if you can just give me your best argument.  I understand your comment above and your point of view, but your comment "i simply see that rifle as what suits me best" really goes to my point, which is those weapons are really a hobby or a choice whereas one can make a compelling self-defense argument for a hand gun or a lower capacity rifle.on point #, I guess we agree based on the first sentence

      Yes, you could make an argument that a handgun (the PROVEN and ACTUAL weapon of choice for mass murders) would be the ideal choice for home defense. Yes, you could make an argument that a lower capacity rifle (like a .22 caliber rifle similar to the one Adam Lanza used to kill his mother and gain access to the assault rifle used in the Sandy Hook shooting) would be ideal as well. As far as these weapons being a choice; they're all a choice. I assume that anyone who breaks onto my property or into my home is not alone. I will also assume that they are armed. I would prefer to deal with any and all threats at a comfortable distance. However, I would prefer a rifle that could be functional and effective at both long, medium, and close range. God forbid, this intruder is stupid enough to actually want to get involved in a gunfight; I want to make sure that I have as much ammunition that I could possibly have readily available to me. In survival situations, it can serve as personal/property defense, as well as an effective and accurate hunting weapon. Is that good enough for you(although I already know the answer)?

      then why ask?  just kidding.  Sure.  I get the point of view, but think of it this way, the most compelling argument you can make for having a gun is self-defense or defense of property.  I can see having a handgun for that, in fact from personal experience as I have been robbed at gun point.  I just don't think your "preference" carries a lot of weight when weighed against the deadly nature of the weapon.  In other words, non-gun, non-survivalist people would say, "do I want to give the Lanzas and the Holmes of the world access to a rifle and a 100 round drum clip . .  so that DH feels secure against a roving band of marauders that may not even exist?at the moment of truth, who wouldn't want machine guns and grenades etc.?  Just like if I am involved in an automobile accident I wish I was in a tank . . .  strangely, I am not allowed to have tank . . .  wonder why?Good points though.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

      lol

      lol

      lol

      really? ^^^  I almost feel bad for you Olaf Berskerker Jr.  . . .

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      DonkeyHunter, a word of advice:wargames-quote-not-to-play_medium.jpg

      Buggsy is intimidated by the prospect of someone disagreeing with him.

      You hit this one on the head, Counselor.  I tiptoe all around this forum hoping nobody disagrees with me.

      My guess is your size prevents you from tip toeing anywhere tiny . ..  but if you asked someone to explain it to you . . . you might realize that I was suggesting that when someone points out you're wrong -- like you were about Heller, as one example -- or that they have a differing point of view your only response is to try to "silence" them with nonsense. . . . .It's a weak effort by you, almost embarrassing. .  . but I wasn't really expecting more. . . . garden variety, brain dead attacking the messenger because you cant formulate an actual substantive response . . . .maybe a little less time at the gun club and a little more time thinking?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Sure.  I get the point of view, but think of it this way, the most compelling argument you can make for having a gun is self-defense or defense of property.  I can see having a handgun for that, in fact from personal experience as I have been robbed at gun point.

      If that's the most compelling argument that I can make, then why are handguns given a free pass from you? I just gave you my reasoning for my preference.

      I just don't think your "preference" carries a lot of weight when weighed against the deadly nature of the weapon.  In other words, non-gun, non-survivalist people would say, "do I want to give the Lanzas and the Holmes of the world access to a rifle and a 100 round drum clip . .  so that DH feels secure against a roving band of marauders that may not even exist?

      Again, this is your OPINION. And again, Lanza gained access to a weapon that you want banned; by using one (that you think is okay) to shoot his mom.

      at the moment of truth, who wouldn't want machine guns and grenades etc.?  Just like if I am involved in an automobile accident I wish I was in a tank . . .  strangely, I am not allowed to have tank . . .  wonder why?

      That's just weak. It's pretty clear to me that you want a total ban of AR-style rifles and a total ban of larger capacity magazines.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Sure.  I get the point of view, but think of it this way, the most compelling argument you can make for having a gun is self-defense or defense of property.  I can see having a handgun for that, in fact from personal experience as I have been robbed at gun point.

      If that's the most compelling argument that I can make, then why are handguns given a free pass from you? I just gave you my reasoning for my preference.

      I just don't think your "preference" carries a lot of weight when weighed against the deadly nature of the weapon.  In other words, non-gun, non-survivalist people would say, "do I want to give the Lanzas and the Holmes of the world access to a rifle and a 100 round drum clip . .  so that DH feels secure against a roving band of marauders that may not even exist?

      Again, this is your OPINION. And again, Lanza gained access to a weapon that you want banned; by using one (that you think is okay) to shoot his mom.

      at the moment of truth, who wouldn't want machine guns and grenades etc.?  Just like if I am involved in an automobile accident I wish I was in a tank . . .  strangely, I am not allowed to have tank . . .  wonder why?

      That's just weak. It's pretty clear to me that you want a total ban of AR-style rifles and a total ban of larger capacity magazines.

      1. Handguns given a free pass? - I am not sure I understand that, but the 2nd Amendment gives us a right to bear arms. However, even the most conservative Supreme Court in recent history said that that right was limited to preventing an all out ban (see Heller, aka the DC gun ban case).  I believe in the right to bear arms.2. Of course it is my opinion these are all opinions BUT just think about what you are saying . . .  why did Lanza bother to kill his mom to get aces to that assault rifle? He had a rifle right?  Why did he want the assault rifle then?  my point was that the justification (i.e., the potential roving bands of marauders) is really thin compared to just a general need of self defense or defense of property, which can be satisfied by something other than a 100 round clip.3. I don't think you have to ban AR rifles or high capacity magazines.  I think an alternative to that is to control access to them, but again I wouldn't be against banning them either because the justification for having them is basically sport or hobby . . . or that off chance that a roving band of marauders shows up (j/k). . . and when those items get in the hands of a Lanza (who by your on words looked past the rile is his own hands to get to a more effective killer) they do great harm, so the benefit (sports enjoyment) is outweighed by the risk (mass murder).  The fact that someone can achieve the same results with another weapon is a not a defense to the risk created by assault rifles/high capacity magazines, its an invitation to look even further than assault rifles/high capacity magazines, right? Well, when you look further you do so through the prism of the 2nd Amendment and a legitimate concern over self-defense and defense of property.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      You are looking at the “potential” harm these weapon can produce. I have shown you FACTS that sidearms are the most commonly used weapon in mass shootings and it wasn’t even close in comparison. The problem with MOST gun-control advocates (and I’m not necessarily including you) is that they have no idea on how guns work, what kind of guns are what, what their effectiveness is, etc. It just blows my mind that the BIGGEST problem is the lack of universal background checks, dangerous loopholes, and the lack of mental care and rehabilitation. Yet, despite evidence that proves otherwise, I read more and more that the real problem are Assault Rifles and high capacity magazines and that they need to be restricted or banned. It makes absolutely ZERO sense.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      You are looking at the "potential" harm these weapon can produce. I have shown you FACTS that sidearms are the most commonly used weapon in mass shootings and it wasn't even close in comparison. The problem with MOST gun-control advocates (and I'm not necessarily including you) is that they have no idea on how guns work, what kind of guns are what, what their effectiveness is, etc. It just blows my mind that the BIGGEST problem is the lack of universal background checks, dangerous loopholes, and the lack of mental care and rehabilitation. Yet, despite evidence that proves otherwise, I read more and more that the real problem are Assault Rifles and high capacity magazines and that they need to be restricted or banned. It makes absolutely ZERO sense.

      where do you read that part in bold? I've never seen that.  AR and HCM are "a" problem obviously, not the 'real" problem.  Anyway, how can it make zero sense?  I mean just from an objective perspective, there's obviously a factual basis for people to be against having high capacity magazines and "assault rifles" in society, right?  You might disagree with it -- strike that, you do -- but that does not mean it makes zero sense.  In fact, its not really even that complicated:1. only a very small number of Americans even value "assault rifles" and "high capacity magazines" enough to fight for them (its a tiny minority that think they are some how essential, most only look at them as a sporting item)2. OBVIOUSLY "assault rifles" and "high capacity magazines" are not the only way to kill a lot of people at once, but just as OBVIOUS is the fact that a "100 round drum clip" really serves no purpose beyond doing what the guy in Colorado did with it.beyond that, it is not just perception that assault rifles and high capacity magazines are a "weapon of choice" for mass killers, its common sense, just as it is common sense that a mass shooter would chose a school or a shppoing mall over your "back 40."  The common sense arithmetic is simple . . . . densely populated area + lots of bullets = lots of death.  Hand guns are a problem, but, as I said, there is a legitimate social purpose for handguns that does not fit with "100 round drum clips."  Here's an article discussing the issue in the context of a revided "assault rifle" ban, as you can see the GOAL is clearly defined (in bold):More than half of the killers we studied in our investigation of 62 mass shootings over the last three decades possessed weapons that would be banned by Feinstein's bill, including various semi-automatic rifles, guns with military features, and handguns using magazines with more than 10 rounds. The damage these weapons can cause has been on grim display since last summer, from Aurora to Milwaukee to Minneapolis to Newtown, where attacks carried out with them left a total of 118 people injured and dead."They got the most shots," said a Chicago teenager who prefers high-capacity magazines. "You can shoot forever."Ultimately, "assault weapon" and "high-capacity magazine" are political terms—there is no official or widely accepted definition for either, and different legislation has treated them differently. Feinstein's new bill seeks to improve upon the 1994 ban she authored, which expired in 2004; gun manufacturers easily sidestepped that law by making superficial modifications to their weapons.The new legislation aims to outlaw weapons that let a shooter fire a large number of bullets quickly without having to reload. Law enforcement officials we consulted generally considered that to be a reasonable approach for distinguishing between firearms used for sport or self-defense and military-style weapons designed to maximize body countsAnd look, "law enforcement officials" agree with me (in red) . .  I did not know that until just now.I don't really see how its that complicated, and its not just about "mass shootings" . .  obviously high capacity magazines are attractive to someone who want to kill a lot of people (see in red):Feinstein's Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 isn't just about mass shootings, of course. By far the most common weapons used in these cases are semi-automatic handguns—the type of weapon also at the heart of the daily gun violence plaguing American communities. Banning high-capacity magazines may be especially key with regard to these guns, not only because they're popular among mass shooters, but also because they tend to increase casualties in street violence, as a veteran ATF agent explained to us in a recent interview.The devices have appeal on the streets. A Chicago high school student recently described his preference for 30-round magazines to a reporter for This American Life: "They got the most shots. You can shoot forever. Let out 15. Run back to where you going. Somebody else come out and let out five more. There you go."Just out of curiosity, other than making it easier to kill people, what is the purpose of high capacity magazines? In other words, are they necessary for hunting or any other sport? Its just to make it easier to kill people, right?  to take a gun and make it more lethal? I mean that's why machine guns are preferred right?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      How can it make zero sense?  I mean just from an objective perspective, there’s obviously a factual basis for people to be against having high capacity magazines and “assault rifles” in society, right? You might disagree with it — strike that, you do — but that does not mean it makes zero sense.  In fact, its not really even that complicated:

      I don't know, is there a "factual" basis? I'm sure it's along the lines of, "Ooohhh...look how many people those big, mean, scary guns killed". When in reality pistols have caused more damage. So again, opinion.

      1. only a very small number of Americans even value "assault rifles" and "high capacity magazines" enough to fight for them (its a tiny minority that think they are some how essential, most only look at them as a sporting item)

      I'd like to see your link or reference to this.

      2. OBVIOUSLY "assault rifles" and "high capacity magazines" are not the only way to kill a lot of people at once, but just as OBVIOUS is the fact that a "100 round drum clip" really serves no purpose beyond doing what the guy in Colorado did with it.

      Again, that's your opinion Vin! One instance it was used. Fine. Ban it. Don't really care.

      beyond that, it is not just perception that assault rifles and high capacity magazines are a "weapon of choice" for mass killers, its common sense, just as it is common sense that a mass shooter would chose a school or a shppoing mall over your "back 40."

      YES IT IS! What don't you understand? What part of this is going over your head? FACT, STATISTICS, NUMBERS have shown and proved that HANDGUNS are the most commonly used.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      What is the purpose of a ” 100 round drum clip?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      Tyranny.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Tyranny.

      +1

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      For 100 liberals.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      Tyranny.

      +1

      -1Illuminati.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      For 100 liberals.

      Clear the scum evenly....50 liberals and 50 conservatives.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      For 100 liberals.

      Clear the scum evenly....50 liberals and 50 conservatives.

      Either way, I wouldn't have to reload. So many other things I could do with that split second it takes to interchange magazines.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      Gives you an extra split second to piss, sh*t, and ejaculate all over those dead corpses….Too much??

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Gives you an extra split second to piss, sh*t, and ejaculate all over those dead corpses....Too much??

      Nope, just on the liberal ones.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Gives you an extra split second to piss, sh*t, and ejaculate all over those dead corpses....Too much??

      Lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Gives you an extra split second to piss, sh*t, and ejaculate all over those dead corpses....Too much??

      Lol

      Why am I not surprised you'd find this funny?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Gives you an extra split second to piss, sh*t, and ejaculate all over those dead corpses....Too much??

      Lol

      Why am I not surprised you'd find this funny?

      huh?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      If Bloomberg's Everytown ends gun control gridlock, he will save livesFormer New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg this week announced new funding and a new organization to level the political playing field against the gun lobby. The rest of us need to do our part and stand up to stop the madness the gun lobby engenders.Before joining the Colorado Senate, I spent years as a paramedic and then as a police officer, and I saw a lot of gun violence first-hand. As a state Senator and party leader, allowing my friends, neighbors and constituents to remain vulnerable to gun violence seemed unconscionable.We heard and continue to hear arguments that people have the unimpeachable right to own these weapons and walk down the street, though most admit those rights stop when someone else starts shooting people. Of course there is no such absolute "right". All rights that exist under our constitution have limitations.Is forcing someone to reload their gun after cranking out 15 rounds a limit we can’t tolerate? Is allowing children precious seconds to escape a shooter just too inconvenient for rabbit hunters who don’t want to have to reload? Is requiring a background check to provide a measure of assurance that you are not a criminal or mentally ill before permitting you to purchase a gun unreasonable?If a 20-year-old man were to walk down the street in the middle of downtown Colorado Springs, my hometown, wearing black pants, black shoes and a black shirt overlaid with a shooting vest loaded with four 20-round magazines, three 30-round magazines, and a 15- and an 18-round magazine, carrying a Bushmaster XM15-E2S (a variation of the US military’s standard M-16) loaded with another 30-round magazine, along with a fully loaded Glock 10mm semi-automatic pistol in a holster strapped to his right thigh and a fully loaded 9mm Sig Sauer semi-automatic pistol in a holster strapped to his right hip – all in plain view – he would break no Colorado law.Unless, of course, he crossed the street outside a crosswalk: In that case, he would be guilty of jaywalking.Before 1 July 2013 he could have also bought every item described above in the state of Colorado without so much as a background check – because of legislation I championed and help pass – he no longer can. In Colorado today, you must get a background check before buying a firearm: That is the only restriction we imposed. In most states, to this day, that hypothetical man can legally buy all that firepower without a background check by simply going to a gun show or visiting the trunk of some entrepreneur’s car and paying whatever price is asked.Our hypothetical gun-laden 20-year old would have to step on school grounds to break a Colorado gun-related law. If he were on foot, someone might see him coming, lock down the school and call the police. But, if he were to drive up to the school’s front door, school officials would be lucky to have 10 seconds to notice that this man was on their school’s grounds with three guns and take action.With a semi-automatic rifle, he could fire bullets as fast as he could squeeze the trigger until his magazine were to run dry – but the gun, designed for the battlefield, reloads smoothly (though it could take an amateur gunman several seconds).Our hypothetical guy could repeat this four times, firing 120 rounds. Then he could reach down and grab the handgun strapped to his thigh and fire all those bullets and finally, he could grab the gun strapped to his hip and unload it on his victims or the pursuing police.Of course, none of this is really hypothetical. This description comes right from the Danbury State Attorney’s report concerning the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown. I just applied the facts to my hometown.When prevention fails, these incidents rarely end without devastating destruction. We can’t hope to prevent violence by noticing someone armed to the teeth entering a school, a theater or a mall. We can't arm everyone and hope to deter planned violent attacks or end them sooner and with fewer casualties. Even with the presence of an armed guard, like we had at Columbine High School, our attempts to stop these attacks will be muted since suicide is often the shooter’s intent.The vast majority of Americans agree that we need responsible regulation of guns, but unfortunately, the few with arsenals in their basements are too loud and most politicians can’t think through the noise. They often ask us for moments of silence to honor the victims. May I suggest, instead, that what we need is leadership.I lost my Senate seat in a recall election because I believed that requiring shooters to reload after 15 rounds and undergo background checks before buying their guns in the first place was a common-sense approach to gun safety. Unlike some politicians, I don’t mourn the loss of my seat. Instead I mourn the senseless, preventable loss of human life.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Bloomberg isn’t the only one who cares about this issue, but he may be the most prominent. We need more big voices to get involved in solving the problem of senseless gun violence in America. But we also need to get some basic facts straight.-- Guns kill. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence reports that an average of 86 people are killed by guns every day in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that between 2000 and 2010, more than 300,000 people died from guns.-- Guns are the most common weapon used in murders and manslaughters. Handguns comprised 72.5% of the firearms used in murder and non-negligent manslaughter incidents in 2011: 4.1% were with shotguns, 3.8% were with rifles,18.5% were with unspecified firearms.-- Children are often victims of gun violence. Eighty-two children under 5 years old died from firearms in 2010, and half of all juveniles killed in the same year were killed with a gun. As reported by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, nearly three times more children were injured by firearms in 2010 than the number of U.S. soldiers wounded in action the same year in the war in Afghanistan.-- Guns kill young African-American men more than anything else. In deaths of 15- to 24-year-olds, firearms homicide rates in the United States are about 43 times higher than in other developed countries, and for young African-American men ages 15-24, it's the leading cause of death. For African-American male youth, firearms homicides surpass unintentional injuries, cancer, HIV and other diseases combined.Of course, gun rights advocates often point out that people don't need guns to kill. They can use other weapons such as knives. This is true, but in practice people are nowhere near as likely to get killed with a knife. In America, of 14,022 homicides in 2011, 11,101 were committed with firearms. The rate of fatality is nearly four times higher when someone uses a gun rather than a knife to assault another person.Stronger background screenings of potential gun owners would be a good start to curtailing firearm deaths. A study to be published in a forthcoming issue of Journal of Urban Health shows that when Missouri repealed a handgun law in 2007 that required all handgun purchasers to verify that they had passed a background check, the murder rate increased by 16%, adding 55 to 63 murders per year.Even before the results of the study were released, many Americans -- including most gun owners -- supported universal background checks. That's just one reason for Congress to pick up the issue of gun control again. Another is that since the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, which was the last time there was a serious debate about gun control, there have been 44 more school shootings and 28 deaths.Now that the debate has again been sparked, let's try to find ways that would both preserve individual rights and make guns less responsible for deaths.A common sense approach is offered in the 2013 book "Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis" by Daniel Webster and Jon Vernick, with a forward by Michael Bloomberg. We should strengthen background checks, ban assault weapons and magazines that fire more than 10 rounds, and fund research on what actually works to end gun violence.If you agree, please follow something my father, an avid gun lover, liked to say: We need to make it tough to get guns because too many careless people use them to end petty arguments and squabbles. Let's not try to do it state by state. Let's take a stance as a nation.Jill Koyama is an anthropologist and assistant professor of educational policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona. She is a fellow in the Op-Ed Project

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      -- Guns are the most common weapon used in murders and manslaughters. Handguns comprised 72.5% of the firearms used in murder and non-negligent manslaughter incidents in 2011: 4.1% were with shotguns, 3.8% were with rifles,18.5% were with unspecified firearms.

      But, wait, I thought AR's were the weapon...oh...never mind.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      -- Guns are the most common weapon used in murders and manslaughters. Handguns comprised 72.5% of the firearms used in murder and non-negligent manslaughter incidents in 2011: 4.1% were with shotguns, 3.8% were with rifles,18.5% were with unspecified firearms.

      But, wait, I thought AR's were the weapon...oh...never mind.

      I think you are confusing two issues. Handguns are most used weapons because they are ubiqitous, they are literally everywhere. There are many assault rifles/high capcity magazines, but certainly not on par with handguns, so you're substituting "avaiblity" for "choice," right? Inherent in your comment is the notion that every mass killer was faced with an equal oportunity to CHOSE between handguns and assault rufles.high capcity clips . . .  when there is unequal availability, right?Assault rifles/haigh capacity magazines are "weapon of choice" because they are designed for mass murder. Sometimes (probably most times) killers use what they have available, but can you show me an example of an Adam Lanza using a rifle to get access to a handgun? how about a killer like the one in Santa Monica building a handgun in his room?  how about a guy deciding to give up his assault rifle and 100 round drum clip for a 6 shooter before entering a movie theater?  There's a reason these guys went to the lengths (i.e. made the "choice") they did, right?the fact that handguns are used a lot doesnt mean that mass killers truned down an assault rifle/high capacity magazine, right? That's just common snese, right?  Same reason your "preference" would be to hold of a roving band of marauders at your property from a distance, without having to reload, right?  Same concept?  Not even sure how its controversial, but saying hand guns were used is not an indictment of assault rifles/high capacity magazines, its an INVITATION for anti-gun people to go FURTHER than assault rifles/high capcity magazines, right?By the way, did you ever answer what the purpose was of a "100 round drum clip" besides killing a lot of things or being more successful at killing? Why do you think James Holmes bought one before walikng in a movie theater as Batman?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Hey DH  –  have ytou ever looked at the number killed from those “mass murder” stats?  In other words, the number killed per vent with a handgun versus the number killed per event with an assault rifle or handgun with a high capacity magazine?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn’t care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what’s important.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      It’s like deja vu all over again ………

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      Ugh . . . Illuminator doing what he do . . .

      saying hand guns were used is not an indictment of assault rifles/high capacity magazines, its an INVITATION for anti-gun people to go FURTHER than assault rifles/high capcity magazines, right?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      It's like deja vu all over again .........

      except this time the players are known . . . right Junior?lol

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Well one is, then there is the newcomer Donkey Hunter “pwning” you like everyone else.#oblivious

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Well one is, then there is the newcomer Donkey Hunter "pwning" you like everyone else.#oblivious

      I love when you use the hashtag #oblivious . .  it shows you mad Olaf Berserker Jr.    . .  and the part in bold is pricelessEven funnier (or as some would say "more funnier") is the teenage girl reference "pwning" ..  . . . as if a discussion about guns . . .  is a rapper's rap off . ..  lmao.  Junior, you do whatever brings you confidence . .  . stalking me, stand on shoe box to reach 5' 6' . .  tell me I have been "pwned" . . .  what ever works for you non-oblivious "anonymous"  Junior.(yikes)

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Btw, Olaf Berserker Jr . . . . there is a certain poetic justice to you sitting on the sidelines watching and rooting for some other person to “pwn” me . . .  .hopefully you’re not #oblivious to that too . .

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Well one is, then there is the newcomer Donkey Hunter "pwning" you like everyone else.

      180px-Leetspeak.pnglike totally . .  but first take a selfie

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      That's why I'm pretty close to being done with this debate. I present FACTS and Vin responds with OPINIONS.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      That's why I'm pretty close to being done with this debate. I present FACTS and Vin responds with OPINIONS.

      well, it not really a debate and Illuminator's comment isn't even mine, but that's fine. Thanks for the discussion

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      lol

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      Ugh . . . Illuminator doing what he do . . .

      saying hand guns were used is not an indictment of assault rifles/high capacity magazines, its an INVITATION for anti-gun people to go FURTHER than assault rifles/high capcity magazines, right?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Strange behavior indeed:The assault rifle that 23-year-old John Zawahri used in his Santa Monica shooting spree is illegal in California. But Police Chief Jacqueline Seabrooks said Zawahri came up with an enterprising solution."We know Zawahri was able to buy gun components from various sources across the country to build his own .223 semi-automatic rifle," she said. Components to build a semi-automatic rifle are available on the Internet. So are the assembly instructions. The sale of most gun parts online is not regulated -- except for one critical component. It's called the lower receiver. It holds the mechanical parts of the gun, such as the trigger. A background check is required to buy one.But police believe Zawahri got around that by buying a partially-completed lower receiver and modifying it. Gun enthusiasts call them 80-percent receivers.Police say one of the reasons Zawahri may have used a homemade gun in his shooting rampage could be because his request to obtain a gun in 2011 was deniedwhy go through the effort? maybe because the 6 shooter he could've purchased would've clashed with his outfit?130608201911-03-santa-monica-shooting-evidence-horizontal-gallery.jpg

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      weird, there are handguns available on every corner and online, but this guy bought a 100 round drum clip:"Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates said a 100-round drum magazine was recovered at the shooting scene. He said that it could have been used to fire up to 60 shots in a minute. On Friday, 12 people were killed, and another 58 injured, all but a few by gunfire, he said."wonder why? He had a shotgun and two handguns, so why the AR and the drum clip  . .  .  made it more likely he would be detected, right?  You think there is a chance the AR and the drum clip fit in with the "motif" (i.e., the costume)?shooter-gear.jpg

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Well one is, then there is the newcomer Donkey Hunter "pwning" you like everyone else.#oblivious

      I love when you use the hashtag #oblivious . . 

      could just use #vinbotsame thing

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      That's why I'm pretty close to being done with this debate. I present FACTS and Vin responds with OPINIONS.

      It's like deja vu all over again, but it's not him it's you .......

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      That's why I'm pretty close to being done with this debate. I present FACTS and Vin responds with OPINIONS.

      well, it not really a debate

      of course it isn't, nice that you finally admit it

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      How about this guy, you think he watched the news on Sandy Hook?"A 20-year-old man is facing criminal charges after allegedly firing shots from an assault rifle Tuesday at an Atlanta-area elementary school.No one was injured in the shooting and all students and teachers were accounted for and safe. The suspect, later identified as Michael Brandon Hill, fired at least a half-dozen shots with an assault rifle from inside the school and officers returned fire, DeKalb County Police Chief Cedric L. Alexander said at a news conference.The suspect told a person inside the school that he didn’t want to hurt anyone, but he wanted to talk to police, MyFoxAtlanta.com reported.Hill is charged with aggravated assault on a police officer, terroristic threats and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon."

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      That's why I'm pretty close to being done with this debate. I present FACTS and Vin responds with OPINIONS.

      well, it not really a debate

      of course it isn't, nice that you finally admit it

      lol, you cant help yourself Olaf Berserker Jr. . . . . . everything is a (very) personal competition with you . . . . . "ew, you were 'pwned' . . . . but first let me take a selfie!"Listen Junior . . . . if you want to operate under the #oblivious and #delusional view that this is a competition . . . . then have it at . . . . what ever helps you build some confidence(wow)180px-Leetspeak.pnglike totally . .  but first take a selfie

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Strange behavior indeed:The assault rifle that 23-year-old John Zawahri used in his Santa Monica shooting spree is illegal in California. But Police Chief Jacqueline Seabrooks said Zawahri came up with an enterprising solution."We know Zawahri was able to buy gun components from various sources across the country to build his own .223 semi-automatic rifle," she said. Components to build a semi-automatic rifle are available on the Internet. So are the assembly instructions. The sale of most gun parts online is not regulated -- except for one critical component. It's called the lower receiver. It holds the mechanical parts of the gun, such as the trigger. A background check is required to buy one.But police believe Zawahri got around that by buying a partially-completed lower receiver and modifying it. Gun enthusiasts call them 80-percent receivers.Police say one of the reasons Zawahri may have used a homemade gun in his shooting rampage could be because his request to obtain a gun in 2011 was deniedwhy go through the effort? maybe because the 6 shooter he could've purchased would've clashed with his outfit?130608201911-03-santa-monica-shooting-evidence-horizontal-gallery.jpg

      Are you trying to tell me that a crazy *sshole who wanted to carry out a criminal act was able to find a way around a  GUN RESTRICTION ? NO WAY. IT'S NOT POSSIBLE. GUN RESTRICTIONS ARE SUPPOSED TO STOP THESE THINGS!

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Well one is, then there is the newcomer Donkey Hunter "pwning" you like everyone else.#oblivious

      I love when you use the hashtag #oblivious . . 

      could just use #vinbotsame thing

      lmao . . .  didn't you say you could teach me to read?  Are you a teacher by any chance?  Because if so . . . . Lord help us on the reading . . ..  my word this is funny stuff

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      That's why I'm pretty close to being done with this debate. I present FACTS and Vin responds with OPINIONS.

      well, it not really a debate and Illuminator's comment isn't even mine, but that's fine. Thanks for the discussion

      You can say that again. Don't know who Illuminator is and nor do I care.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Strange behavior indeed:The assault rifle that 23-year-old John Zawahri used in his Santa Monica shooting spree is illegal in California. But Police Chief Jacqueline Seabrooks said Zawahri came up with an enterprising solution."We know Zawahri was able to buy gun components from various sources across the country to build his own .223 semi-automatic rifle," she said. Components to build a semi-automatic rifle are available on the Internet. So are the assembly instructions. The sale of most gun parts online is not regulated -- except for one critical component. It's called the lower receiver. It holds the mechanical parts of the gun, such as the trigger. A background check is required to buy one.But police believe Zawahri got around that by buying a partially-completed lower receiver and modifying it. Gun enthusiasts call them 80-percent receivers.Police say one of the reasons Zawahri may have used a homemade gun in his shooting rampage could be because his request to obtain a gun in 2011 was deniedwhy go through the effort? maybe because the 6 shooter he could've purchased would've clashed with his outfit?130608201911-03-santa-monica-shooting-evidence-horizontal-gallery.jpg

      Are you trying to tell me that a crazy *sshole who wanted to carry out a criminal act was able to find a way around a  GUN RESTRICTION ? NO WAY. IT'S NOT POSSIBLE. GUN RESTRICTIONS ARE SUPPOSED TO STOP THESE THINGS!

      see the part in bold . . .  anyone ever actually say that?No law will stop a properly motivated killer . . . but in the case of the Santa Monica shooter he was stopped by a law . .  and then he exploited another gun lobby driven loophole to build a gunbut, let me ask you . ..  why change the subject to ineffective gun restrictions?  Do you agree that this guy went a really long ay to get an "assault rifle"?  Why would he do that?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      That's why I'm pretty close to being done with this debate. I present FACTS and Vin responds with OPINIONS.

      well, it not really a debate and Illuminator's comment isn't even mine, but that's fine. Thanks for the discussion

      You can say that again. Don't know who Illuminator is and nor do I care.

      well, I guess to the extent that it is people offering different views you might call it that, but the notion that there is a "winner" or a "loser" between a survivalist gun owner/enthusiasts and a gun control advocate is really sort of absurd, isn't it? . . . at least to the extent that anyone thinks a mind would be changed . . lolbut like I said to Olaf Berserker Jr., if you guys feel the need to say "its no debate"  that's fine, no big deal(Btw, my point was that your comment suggests that you view Bucfucious's comment as being the same as mine . .  which is laughable, especially considering I pointed out the difference right above your comment)

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      anyone else want to help Olaf Berserker Jr. with the joke that keeps flying right over his head?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      “anyone ever actually say that?”With 6+billion people on the planet. ..im sure its been stated a few times here and there.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      "anyone ever actually say that?"With 6+billion people on the planet. ..im sure its been stated a few times here and there.

      good point, maybe it was the Illuminati

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      well, I guess to the extent that it is people offering different views you might call it that, but the notion that there is a "winner" or a "loser" between a survivalist gun owner/enthusiasts and a gun control advocate is really sort of absurd, isn't it? . . . at least to the extent that anyone thinks a mind would be changed . . lolbut like I said to Olaf Berserker Jr., if you guys feel the need to say "its no debate"  that's fine, no big deal(Btw, my point was that your comment suggests that you view Bucfucious's comment as being the same as mine . .  which is laughable, especially considering I pointed out the difference right above your comment)

      You assume way too much. And I never claimed their was a winner or a loser between a gun owner/gun advocate and a gun control advocate/gun banning advoacte.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      They’re among us.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      see the part in bold . . .  anyone ever actually say that?

      That's definitely the thought process of many liberals and gun control advocates. "If we ban them and make it 'difficult' for criminals to obtain, they'll just give up".

      No law will stop a properly motivated killer . . . but in the case of the Santa Monica shooter he was stopped by a law . .  and then he exploited another gun lobby driven loophole to build a gun

      No sh*t.

      but, let me ask you . ..  why change the subject to ineffective gun restrictions?  Do you agree that this guy went a really long ay to get an "assault rifle"?  Why would he do that?

      Umm...my guess was that he was a lunatic. And that by doing what he did, the media would glorify it, give it an absurd amount of press, and give him (along with others) their "15 minutes".

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      well, I guess to the extent that it is people offering different views you might call it that, but the notion that there is a "winner" or a "loser" between a survivalist gun owner/enthusiasts and a gun control advocate is really sort of absurd, isn't it? . . . at least to the extent that anyone thinks a mind would be changed . . lolbut like I said to Olaf Berserker Jr., if you guys feel the need to say "its no debate"  that's fine, no big deal(Btw, my point was that your comment suggests that you view Bucfucious's comment as being the same as mine . .  which is laughable, especially considering I pointed out the difference right above your comment)

      You assume way too much. And I never claimed their was a winner or a loser between a gun owner/gun advocate and a gun control advocate/gun banning advoacte.

      I guess this kind of led me to that assumption:

      Sure there are about twenty times as many deaths by handgun as there are by rifle but Vin doesn't care about that. What he wants is for them to be evenly spaced. Even spacing is a problem with rifles, but not with handguns. Vin knows what's important.

      That's why I'm pretty close to being done with this debate. I present FACTS and Vin responds with OPINIONS.

      well, it not really a debate and Illuminator's comment isn't even mine, but that's fine. Thanks for the discussion

      You can say that again. Don't know who Illuminator is and nor do I care.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      see the part in bold . . .  anyone ever actually say that?

      That's definitely the thought process of many liberals and gun control advocates. "If we ban them and make it 'difficult' for criminals to obtain, they'll just give up".

      No law will stop a properly motivated killer . . . but in the case of the Santa Monica shooter he was stopped by a law . .  and then he exploited another gun lobby driven loophole to build a gun

      No sh*t.

      but, let me ask you . ..  why change the subject to ineffective gun restrictions?  Do you agree that this guy went a really long ay to get an "assault rifle"?  Why would he do that?

      Umm...my guess was that he was a lunatic. And that by doing what he did, the media would glorify it, give it an absurd amount of press, and give him (along with others) their "15 minutes".

      well, we agree on most of this. My point was that I have never said restrictions are a perfect solution, that would be absurd as you yourself note. I agree with the guy being a lunatic. I also agree with the "15 minutes" of fame, which brings us full circle doesn't it? I mean, he made a CHOICE to build an assault rifle when there are handguns everywhere. Just like the "Batman" guy in Colorado and Lanza in Sandy Hook.  The use of an AR is "GLORIFIED" (poor word choice, perhaps) but not just by the media also by the MANUFACTURERS themselves and enthusiasts (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQpfQd1397E) and by popular culture (video games, as one example).  Assault rifles and high capacity magazines are a bizarre part of the modern "suicide by cop" exit from the worldSearch "shooter video game" on Google:https://www.google.com/search?q=shooter+video+game&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=ycBWU7b6IYKvyATj64KgAg&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1680&bih=881see anyone with a six shooter? It mostly stuff like this, right?crysis_2_shooter_video_game-t2.jpgor this . . in a school:Screen-Shot-2013-03-26-at-7.13.05-AM-630x356.pngnot sure what that gun is supposed to be, but not a six shooter, right?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Here’s the thing you keep leaving out from the assault weapon/high capacity magazine discussion:1. Are assault rifles/high capacity magazines used less frequently than garden-variety handguns to kill people ---- yes, of course, they aren't as widely available BUT . . .2. when they are used they are usually very deadly, often killing multiple people3. unlike a handgun, they serve very little legitimate purpose == that is the key pointIts not a legitimate defense of assault rifles and high capacity magazines to say "oh yeah, well handguns kill people too" or "oh yeah, you can kill people with a bat too."  assault rifles and high capacity magazines rise and fall on their own merits, so to speak, so that response is just deflection

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3341

      wargames-quote-not-to-play_medium.jpg

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Twinkle toes!

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1645

      anyone else want to help Olaf Berserker Jr. with the joke that keeps flying right over his head?

      Talking to yourself again?  Joke is you, everyone else knows that #vinbot

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      anyone else want to help Olaf Berserker Jr. with the joke that keeps flying right over his head?

      Talking to yourself again?  Joke is you, everyone else knows that #vinbot

      "anonymous"

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Here's the thing you keep leaving out from the assault weapon/high capacity magazine discussion:1. Are assault rifles/high capacity magazines used less frequently than garden-variety handguns to kill people ---- yes, of course, they aren't as widely available BUT . . .2. when they are used they are usually very deadly, often killing multiple people3. unlike a handgun, they serve very little legitimate purpose == that is the key pointIts not a legitimate defense of assault rifles and high capacity magazines to say "oh yeah, well handguns kill people too" or "oh yeah, you can kill people with a bat too."  assault rifles and high capacity magazines rise and fall on their own merits, so to speak, so that response is just deflection

      1. I'm not sure that's a legitimate argument considering that the estimate is around 2.5 to 3 million AR's in the U.S. 2. Most guns are Vin.3. That is YOUR OPINION!

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      well, we agree on most of this. My point was that I have never said restrictions are a perfect solution, that would be absurd as you yourself note. I agree with the guy being a lunatic. I also agree with the "15 minutes" of fame, which brings us full circle doesn't it? I mean, he made a CHOICE to build an assault rifle when there are handguns everywhere. Just like the "Batman" guy in Colorado and Lanza in Sandy Hook.  The use of an AR is "GLORIFIED" (poor word choice, perhaps) but not just by the media also by the MANUFACTURERS themselves and enthusiasts (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQpfQd1397E) and by popular culture (video games, as one example).  Assault rifles and high capacity magazines are a bizarre part of the modern "suicide by cop" exit from the worldSearch "shooter video game" on Google:https://www.google.com/search?q=shooter+video+game&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=ycBWU7b6IYKvyATj64KgAg&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1680&bih=881see anyone with a six shooter? It mostly stuff like this, right?crysis_2_shooter_video_game-t2.jpgor this . . in a school:Screen-Shot-2013-03-26-at-7.13.05-AM-630x356.pngnot sure what that gun is supposed to be, but not a six shooter, right?

      All of this simply shows, that the media glorifies it.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Here's the thing you keep leaving out from the assault weapon/high capacity magazine discussion:1. Are assault rifles/high capacity magazines used less frequently than garden-variety handguns to kill people ---- yes, of course, they aren't as widely available BUT . . .2. when they are used they are usually very deadly, often killing multiple people3. unlike a handgun, they serve very little legitimate purpose == that is the key pointIts not a legitimate defense of assault rifles and high capacity magazines to say "oh yeah, well handguns kill people too" or "oh yeah, you can kill people with a bat too."  assault rifles and high capacity magazines rise and fall on their own merits, so to speak, so that response is just deflection

      1. I'm not sure that's a legitimate argument considering that the estimate is around 2.5 to 3 million AR's in the U.S. 2. Most guns are Vin.3. That is YOUR OPINION!

      well, here the responses:1. the estimates for guns are roughly 300 million. That might be off, but are you actually saying that its "illegitimate" to say hand guns are used more often because there are more handguns?  If so, oh well . . .2. most guns are deadly, but are you honestly saying that my 9mm is likely to be as deadly as Holmes' AR with 100 round drum clip?3. That is my opinion, but I invite you to explain  the "legitimate" purpose that an AR with a 100 round clip serves that a 9mm does not?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      well, we agree on most of this. My point was that I have never said restrictions are a perfect solution, that would be absurd as you yourself note. I agree with the guy being a lunatic. I also agree with the "15 minutes" of fame, which brings us full circle doesn't it? I mean, he made a CHOICE to build an assault rifle when there are handguns everywhere. Just like the "Batman" guy in Colorado and Lanza in Sandy Hook.  The use of an AR is "GLORIFIED" (poor word choice, perhaps) but not just by the media also by the MANUFACTURERS themselves and enthusiasts (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQpfQd1397E) and by popular culture (video games, as one example).  Assault rifles and high capacity magazines are a bizarre part of the modern "suicide by cop" exit from the worldSearch "shooter video game" on Google:https://www.google.com/search?q=shooter+video+game&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=ycBWU7b6IYKvyATj64KgAg&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1680&bih=881see anyone with a six shooter? It mostly stuff like this, right?crysis_2_shooter_video_game-t2.jpgor this . . in a school:Screen-Shot-2013-03-26-at-7.13.05-AM-630x356.pngnot sure what that gun is supposed to be, but not a six shooter, right?

      All of this simply shows, that the media glorifies it.

      they do and I agree that the media's actions UNFAIRLY increase the stigma associated with guns, but I also once posted on here a video from a gun manufacture selling an AR-style rifle with a huge clip by showing a video of a guy letting a bunch of rounds fly with a headline that said "kills jihad on cointact," the obvious inference being you need one of these to defend yourself against terrorist in the streets.  Manufacturers sell these things on the basis that they are "military-like."

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1505

      Good Lord, next you’re going to tell us that goods advertised as “homemade” really aren’t.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Michael Bloomberg brings balance to gun-control debate: Editorial"When guns result in bloodshed, Americans predictably look for ways to keep tragedy from striking again. Post-Newtown, the suggested remedies were simple and reasonable: background checks and mental health screenings, to help keep firearms out of the wrong hands.The tragedy was overwhelming. Public support for such sensible restrictions on gun-buying was there. And yet – nothing. In many states, lawmakers took the opportunity to weaken restrictions on who can buy guns.Such is the futility of the gun debate in America. Thanks to the wealth and power of the gun lobby and its mouthpiece, the National Rifle Association, the modern gun control discussion is effectively one-sided.That’s why former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is buying a $50 million ticket to the next debate.The billionaire formed Everytown for Gun Safety, and merged with with two other gun control groups, Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. The idea is to fight the NRA with its own tactics: throwing support behind causes and candidates who back reasonable gun control measures. If the NRA can reward loyal candidates with campaign contributions and threaten pro-gun control lawmakers with well-funded opponents, maybe Bloomberg’s outfit can add balance to the scales. If the NRA can mobilize the public with marketing campaigns that push its message, perhaps Everytown can add an opposing voice to the conversation.more . . . http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/04/bloomberg_brings_balance_to_gun-control_debate_editorial.html

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Michael Bloomberg brings balance to gun-control debate: Editorial"When guns result in bloodshed, Americans predictably look for ways to keep tragedy from striking again. Post-Newtown, the suggested remedies were simple and reasonable: background checks and mental health screenings, to help keep firearms out of the wrong hands.The tragedy was overwhelming. Public support for such sensible restrictions on gun-buying was there. And yet – nothing. In many states, lawmakers took the opportunity to weaken restrictions on who can buy guns.Such is the futility of the gun debate in America. Thanks to the wealth and power of the gun lobby and its mouthpiece, the National Rifle Association, the modern gun control discussion is effectively one-sided.That’s why former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is buying a $50 million ticket to the next debate.The billionaire formed Everytown for Gun Safety, and merged with with two other gun control groups, Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. The idea is to fight the NRA with its own tactics: throwing support behind causes and candidates who back reasonable gun control measures. If the NRA can reward loyal candidates with campaign contributions and threaten pro-gun control lawmakers with well-funded opponents, maybe Bloomberg’s outfit can add balance to the scales. If the NRA can mobilize the public with marketing campaigns that push its message, perhaps Everytown can add an opposing voice to the conversation.more . . . http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/04/bloomberg_brings_balance_to_gun-control_debate_editorial.html

      This is the best and most sensible solution. Not banning certain things.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9891

      Michael Bloomberg brings balance to gun-control debate: Editorial"When guns result in bloodshed, Americans predictably look for ways to keep tragedy from striking again. Post-Newtown, the suggested remedies were simple and reasonable: background checks and mental health screenings, to help keep firearms out of the wrong hands.The tragedy was overwhelming. Public support for such sensible restrictions on gun-buying was there. And yet – nothing. In many states, lawmakers took the opportunity to weaken restrictions on who can buy guns.Such is the futility of the gun debate in America. Thanks to the wealth and power of the gun lobby and its mouthpiece, the National Rifle Association, the modern gun control discussion is effectively one-sided.That’s why former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is buying a $50 million ticket to the next debate.The billionaire formed Everytown for Gun Safety, and merged with with two other gun control groups, Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. The idea is to fight the NRA with its own tactics: throwing support behind causes and candidates who back reasonable gun control measures. If the NRA can reward loyal candidates with campaign contributions and threaten pro-gun control lawmakers with well-funded opponents, maybe Bloomberg’s outfit can add balance to the scales. If the NRA can mobilize the public with marketing campaigns that push its message, perhaps Everytown can add an opposing voice to the conversation.more . . . http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/04/bloomberg_brings_balance_to_gun-control_debate_editorial.html

      This is the best and most sensible solution.

      Wayne agrees. Strike that. He disagrees.  Strike that. He agreed once (after Columbine), but now does not:" LaPierre argued that universal instant background checks would place an undue burden on "the little guy" in the "real world," while criminals would get the guns illegally."why are your views out of step with Wayne's views?  because you area gun OWNER.  Wayne does not represent gun OWNERS . . . he represents gun SELLERS

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9128

      Michael Bloomberg brings balance to gun-control debate: Editorial"When guns result in bloodshed, Americans predictably look for ways to keep tragedy from striking again. Post-Newtown, the suggested remedies were simple and reasonable: background checks and mental health screenings, to help keep firearms out of the wrong hands.The tragedy was overwhelming. Public support for such sensible restrictions on gun-buying was there. And yet – nothing. In many states, lawmakers took the opportunity to weaken restrictions on who can buy guns.Such is the futility of the gun debate in America. Thanks to the wealth and power of the gun lobby and its mouthpiece, the National Rifle Association, the modern gun control discussion is effectively one-sided.That’s why former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is buying a $50 million ticket to the next debate.The billionaire formed Everytown for Gun Safety, and merged with with two other gun control groups, Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. The idea is to fight the NRA with its own tactics: throwing support behind causes and candidates who back reasonable gun control measures. If the NRA can reward loyal candidates with campaign contributions and threaten pro-gun control lawmakers with well-funded opponents, maybe Bloomberg’s outfit can add balance to the scales. If the NRA can mobilize the public with marketing campaigns that push its message, perhaps Everytown can add an opposing voice to the conversation.more . . . http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/04/bloomberg_brings_balance_to_gun-control_debate_editorial.html

      This is the best and most sensible solution.

      Wayne agrees. Strike that. He disagrees.  Strike that. He agreed once (after Columbine), but now does not:" LaPierre argued that universal instant background checks would place an undue burden on "the little guy" in the "real world," while criminals would get the guns illegally."why are your views out of step with Wayne's views?  because you area gun OWNER.  Wayne does not represent gun OWNERS . . . he represents gun SELLERS

      Fine. So maybe he's an idiot. Then again, Feinstein and Gifford aren't the brightest stars in the sky either.