Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Chas0218

Just saw this and thought most everyone on here would be interested.

Recommended Posts

Ok every one blowing off steam..But we got way off the subject...Back to the deal Joe Biden against importing back to the USA  M1 grands & carbines, that we sold to S, Korea years ago..Now  a Rep from Wy.  wants to import them back and sell them to our people..War weapons have always been a no no here..Nothing in that article about other firearms...Right now no solving the problems your bringing up, especially by us here on a fishing forum..,,I am vet too..but with over 300 million guns in the country now weres the end..?  Enough from me on the matter..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny you say weapons of war have always been a no no. Here's the thing we as Americans have been able to buy the garands from the government the 1903s to. Most of which was used in high power competition. Which to those of you that don't know is shooting holes in paper circles at up to a thousand yards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A muzzleloader was once a weapon of war. You live in lala land if you really think any o these idiots in Washington give a crap about anything other than votes and spending our money. I promise you none of them care about anything but keeping the gravy train going. Possible exception for Ted Cruz and rand Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else hear about remington picking up and leaving NY?  Now NY will be losing jobs over all this bureaucratic gun control crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are right, and the future is here so it's time to re-think your gun laws! It's 2013 and you clowns will sale anyone a gun! And Who the hell needs a 7 round clip??? Who do you think you are Rambo?? If you need more than 7 shots, you don't need a bigger clip you need a shooting range! Then you say you need to fight for your constitutional rights???? Your constitutional rights were established long before you had, all the crap that's going on nowadays, so it's time for change OBVIOUSLY! Look what happened today!!!! Do you think those guys needed bigger clips?? YOU NEED TO CHANGE YOUR LAWs!

You definatly don't need some pencil pushing politicians that do not know guns making the changes for use but use definatly need some changes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pickerel killer that was one of the dumbest and most idiotic statements I've ever heard. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened today is a great example of why we oppose gun control. Think about it for a minute. The shooting happened in DC, with guns that were illegal in DC. Therefore he was able to attack people that were unable or actually not allowed to defend themselves. Would you attack someplace where the man standing behind you might have a .45 ACP in his waist? Makes it a little easier to do some damage when there's nobody shooting back. This is how well gun control works

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey watch the news, killer. He only went in with a shot gun. Got the other weapons from some one inside. Most likely a victim. Guess you are better off saying no one needs the high capacity magazine. Cops and soldiers included. Thoughts and prayers go to the families.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pro-gun advocates cite Gary Kleck, a Florida State University professor of criminology whose 1994 national survey estimated that victims used guns 2.5 million times a year in the U.S. to protect themselves. Kleck compared this favorably to the 400,000 times he said criminals used guns against victims.

"In sum," Kleck wrote, "measures that effectively reduce gun availability among the non-criminal majority also would reduce [defensive gun uses] that otherwise would have saved lives, prevented injuries, thwarted rape attempts, driven off burglars, and helped victims retain their property."

 

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/20/nation/la-na-more-guns-20121221

 

And here's just a few documented cases.

 

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcInfoBase.asp?CatID=43

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Killer must not have gotten the whole news story in Canada. Of course he wouldn't have a problem with the U.S. and New York gun laws and what the antis want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how the well thought out responses to this post are pro-gun, and the intelligible posts are anti-gun. Sammy got it right. Civil rights are not bestowed by a government. Even if they were, no matter how hard you try- you cannot be successful in legislating morality.

 

Stop being ignorant. We don't need more than 7 rounds for hunting, target shooting, etc. We need more than 7 rounds because the second amendment is the one that guarantees that this country will always be of, by, and for the people. The ultimate redress of grievances.  aka... AMERICA. 

 

It's not like this is a new argument.

 

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.†
― Thomas Jefferson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had never seen that statement by Jefferson...cool! It still seems incredible to me that our Forefathers were so far sighted and insightful....why the h don't we have any more like them in government these days? Guess natural selection weeded out all the smart ones :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man you fellas awful hard on ole Joe...He's committed to find away to try and slow down gun violence in this country..I think most people would agree with that. Close to 10,000 give or take a few murders by gun fire pretty heavy number and been going on for years, thats 100,000 in 10 years..Pretty sorry state of affairs..

I do not have the statistics in front of me but last year there were a lot of mispelled words, and pencils were involved in a lot of them!

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After many searches I didn't find anyone reported being hurt with an Inceptomatic 57.  They're not illegal in NY yet, so I'm sure some guys are drooling to go get one. 

 

Tom B.

(LongLine)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how the well thought out responses to this post are pro-gun, and the intelligible posts are anti-gun. Sammy got it right. Civil rights are not bestowed by a government. Even if they were, no matter how hard you try- you cannot be successful in legislating morality.

 

Stop being ignorant. We don't need more than 7 rounds for hunting, target shooting, etc. We need more than 7 rounds because the second amendment is the one that guarantees that this country will always be of, by, and for the people. The ultimate redress of grievances.  aka... AMERICA. 

 

It's not like this is a new argument.

 

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.†

― Thomas Jefferson

 

VERY WELL SAID!!

If the horrors of the Newtown shootings were instead comitted by the use of say 2, 5 gallon cans of gasoline being dumped onto the classroom floor and ignited, would the government be on the hunt for gas cans?

We all realize that it is not the guns that are the harm, as I have never seen a gun jump off the rack and start firing itself, but the nut cases that are lose within socieity.

Does anyone know how many people are stabbed to death each year?

I do not, but the way the government wants it's sheeple to be, I be surprised that increased legislation is only around the corner for knives as well.

Hope no one that reads this has a tramatic breakdown as a result, as computer confiscation might be next. :puke:

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope no one that reads this has a tramatic breakdown as a result, as computer confiscation might be next. :puke:

 

We're already being tracked.  In fact everything we all ever posted/emailed is recorded someplace.  After a tragedy, that's the first thing the law enforcement looks at.  Sometimes even before a tragedy.

 

Hmmm....could the nut case have stabbed 12 people to death from 40 ft away?.....hmmmmm?  The fact is a gun was used and the logical thing to address is the tool.  What I'm reading  here is that the majority of respondents are saying "so what, 2nd amendment says we can, so we not only can but we must." 

 

Tom B.

(LongLine)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Car Bombs, Fertilizer & diesel fuel, Molitoff cocktails,Pressure cookers,  ETC. If there were no guns it would be the next best thing. My arm ain't as good as it use to be to throw rocks(what we see on TV  in the middle east) to defend myself / family.

 

 Don't throw the baby out with the bath water because of a few nut jobs. If/when society breaks down , you may wish you had more firepower than you do . And I don't care who reads this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if there is a drunk driver that hits and kills another person, the logical thing to do would be to address the vehicle they were driving or the type of alcohol they were drinking?  I think the logical thing to do would be to address the individuals who are committing the crimes.  What drove them to committ that crime and what can we do to prevent other people like them from doing the same thing...and i definitely don't think taking guns away from law abiding citizens is the answer.  The only thing that will do is prevent law abiding citizens from being able to protect themselves and their families, and give criminals a better chance of committing a crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...