Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2012 18:26:24 GMT -5
afloat, good to have you back. Don't think I'm not storing up any "internet" ammo for the next time.
|
|
|
Post by 2 oars & a trash can on Dec 18, 2012 20:37:22 GMT -5
afloat, good to have you back. Don't think I'm not storing up any "internet" ammo for the next time. So that wasn't you opening the "Hillary '16" headquarters?
|
|
|
Post by HokieChad on Dec 18, 2012 21:55:21 GMT -5
had a situation happen recently that made me realize how important personal safety really is....we were in Charlotte (not a good section) and were eating after a baseball tourney at a McDonald's. We were finishing up and a guy came in with a jacket on. It was May or June, too hot to be wearing a jacket. He started approaching different tables and when he leaned over, I saw a pistol in the back of his jeans, so I knew we better get the hell outta there. I told my wife and Clayton it was time to go. I didn't want to alarm them by telling them anything, I just told them to hurry up. Well, they didn't share my sense of urgency, so I said a little more forcefully, LET'S GO NOW! By this time we were closer to the guy as we were dumping our trays.....I told them to get out the door and get to the car. I walked behind them and as we were halfway across the parking lot, I heard someone start trying to get my attention. I never turned around, I said one more time very forcefully to wife and child.....GET IN THE CAR NOW!
Knowing that guy had a gun and I didn't was one of the most terrifying 30 seconds of my life. My thoughs were consumed by trying to stay calm for my family, but trying to get them out of harms way and getting us out of the restaurant as fast as possible.
|
|
broke
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Post by broke on Dec 19, 2012 7:19:17 GMT -5
Afloat, There is a major difference in the AR15s available to the public that can pass a background check and the AR15 used by military and police. The AR15 available to the public is a SEMI-AUTO. The AR15 used by the military is capable of full automatic fire. Huge difference. My 50 year old Remington 742 will do anything the semi-auto AR 15 will. Major difference is the AR is ugly and menacing looking whereas my Remington is a beautiful rifle with nice Walnut stocks. The fully automatic AR15s are already restricted. How can people debate gun laws if they know nothing about guns? I am talking about the news media. Thank you for bringing up this subject Afloat. Most of the general public knows nothing about ARs or guns in general and believe what the news media tells them. I have no faith in our news media today. Liar, liar, liar. The full automatic version of the AR 15 is a wonderful combat rifle, but is absolutely useless as a hunting rifle. The Semi-auto version is available in a high quality version that is useful for hunting, but it does nothing my old Remington will do except maybe be more accurate and is not as pretty.
|
|
|
Post by mrgreenfish on Dec 19, 2012 8:39:06 GMT -5
Mute point. The gun used in the shooting was not fully automatic. How do you keep idiots from going on shooting rampages. A good start would be doing away with video games that involves killing & murdering.
|
|
|
Post by 2 oars & a trash can on Dec 19, 2012 10:12:25 GMT -5
How do you keep idiots from going on shooting rampages. A good start would be doing away with video games that involves killing & murdering. But this is going to be an infringement on one of those other rights, freedom of expression or something. I went to my son's Xmas singalong at the Elementary school and the turnout was utterly staggering. The janitors got spare chairs from every room they had and people were still standing along the edges of the gym. I've gone to every one of these that he's been in for the last 4 years and never seen anything close to this number. No one knows what to do, everyone is in shock, but if your son daughter nephew niece grand anything or neighbor is singing at the school, guess where you're going to be.
|
|
|
Post by sniper on Dec 19, 2012 20:35:53 GMT -5
My agenda, sir, is to understand why people want to own semi-automatic weapons. When I search the news sites, I find all sorts of posts and articles about banning them. Someone once said that in order to ask a question, one must already be a large percentage of the way to knowing the answer. So my guesses are: 1) Collectors like to have a wide variety of whatever they collect just as a hobby 2) If someone attacks my house and they have one, I better have one also 3) Target practice is fun and it is more fun with a semi-automatic weapon 4) ? are there other reasons ? Float, I'll try to break it down for you. Here are the most common firearms and how they fire: Revolver - Each trigger pull rotates the cylinder (in most cases) and fires a round. Usually limited to 6 shots. Bolt Action Rifle - After a round is fired, the operator pulls a small handle to eject the spent cartridge and loads a new round. Common uses are hunting, target and sniper due to their accuracy. Pump Shotgun - Operates similar to the bolt action rifle. Common uses are hunting, target, home defense, and police. Semi - The use of recoil or gas to eject a spent cartridge and load a new round into the chamber at the same time. This allows one shot to fire per trigger pull. There is no handle or pump to manipulate. The shooter can empty the magazine as quickly as he can pull the trigger. Majority of all handguns made today are semi-automatic. Auto - Restricted to military/police and illegal to purchase today (in most cases). As long as the trigger is held to the rear of the weapon, it will continue to fire until the magazine is empty. After reading your posts, it appears you may have been confused with the operation of semi and auto weapons. But you're not alone. The liberal media and the majority of non gun-owing citizens do not know the difference. That's the scary part. So when you ask the question "why do people want to own semi-automatic weapons" I think the answer is very simple and clear. I don't want to play cowboy with a six-shot revolver when my intruder has a semi-auto. Most of the other reasons have been touched on so I won't go into those. Just wanted to break it down and help clarify...
|
|
|
Post by wishforfish on Dec 20, 2012 1:03:16 GMT -5
Alright, well I sat this one out as long as I can so here is my opinion that no one cares about or wants to hear. 1. The phrase is "moot point" not "mute point". They mean 2 different things and one is nonsensical. I will let you determine which I am referring to. 2. I really do appreciate and am not a little surprised that so many have taken the high road in viewing this as an educational opportunity to explain some of the terminology that may be misleading with regard to firearms. Lord knows the mainstream media (notice I did not say liberal media) has butchered this from the beginning causing much confusion and misunderstanding. 3. I think that Afloat actually brings up a vaild and important topic that needs to be addressed especially given the circumstances we are now dealing with due to the horrific occurence in CT. 4. My answer to his very legitimate questions is "yes on all accounts". The answer to number 4 in my opinion is the "hot topic" everyone gets emotional about and the vexing question that causes so much misunderstanding. 4) ? are there other reasons ? I loved Seajays post and Lund1's but I think the "other" reasons are very simple and more specifically the ones that really matter. We are guaranteed the right to bear arms (without restriction) in our constitution because of distrust in a central government that may have a desire for greater control over the citizenry. The fact that our citizens bear arms was intended to secure our ability to control our own government lest it gain too much power and violate the very freedoms it is sworn to protect. Yes, laws need to be modified and changed for the times and the contitutions' beauty is that it is a living document, capable of change based on the requirements that our society places upon it at any given time. Since this very basic concept was put into effect, many things have changed and altered the interpretation of this constitutional right. Like it or not (and I know some won't) there was a group of southern states that elected to exercise their constitutional right to seccession in the mid-late 1800's and they were promptly addressed by a federal government operating beyond the limits of its' authority. I use this only as an example, not a political statement. Our original design as a Republic has completely given way to a Democracy and Oligarchy and some people are intelligent enough to recognize this, not trade what may seem to be petty or outdated freedoms for a perceived security positon provided by an ever-growing central government in the form of entitlements and sustenance. We are becoming by the choice of our populace Westernized Europeans in a welfare state and part of a world order that no longer recognizes us as being in a position of strength and harbors malicious intentions to our security. I own an AR15, 3 other "assault weapons" and 21 other firearms and have never killed nor had the desire to kill another human being. I use them for self defense, target shooting, hunting and as a means for teaching my child responsibility. I would readily use them to try and prevent a tragedy like we just experienced. I keep them secured and if I had a person living in my household that was mentally ill, I would take additional precautions (OK I opened myself up for one there). The fact that this country can be led to believe that an inanimate object is responsible for a death/s is sickening to me. Of course you can get sued in this country for serving hot coffee when a dumbass drops it in their lap after you give it to them. God bless America. Read more: smlfishingforums.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=anything&action=display&thread=564&page=1#ixzz2FZ8AnT50
|
|
|
Post by leo24551 on Dec 20, 2012 5:23:02 GMT -5
AMEN.
|
|
|
Post by mrgreenfish on Dec 20, 2012 9:23:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wishforfish on Dec 20, 2012 9:36:17 GMT -5
And for the record I am NOT a member of the NRA.
|
|
|
Post by mrgreenfish on Dec 20, 2012 9:51:53 GMT -5
Good because they are ripping the american people off with scare tactics about Obama taking our guns away. Then the gun dealers get to raise their prices. FACT: Obama repealed more gun control laws during his first year in office than Bush did in eight.
|
|
|
Post by striperjohn on Dec 20, 2012 17:54:00 GMT -5
Obama has not passed ONE pro-gun legislation since being President! You are giving him credit for the dozen red "read Conservative Pro-Gun States here" states that passed pro-gun legislation since Obama has been in office. These laws was passed to prevent Obama from writing an executive order and attempting to invoke his Anti-Gun will on the states. These are facts Greenfish. These laws were not needed under President Bush because he was no threat to the Second Amendment. Why not also give him credit for having been responsible for promoting the most gun sales on record. That as well is a fact. Of course those sales are happening because people are now afraid of Obama making attempts to take our guns.
|
|
|
Post by wishforfish on Dec 20, 2012 21:14:28 GMT -5
I agree with Striperjohn and Obama tried to take political credit for doing so but really had nothing to do with it at all. When you use a satirical cartoon to make your point and are serious about it , that shows little concern for the interpretation of facts just an emotional desire to make your view legitmate with whatever is available to you...except reason. Forgive the pun but I guess mrgreenfish is making a "mute point". Oh well, at least I am amusing myself now.
|
|
|
Post by mrgreenfish on Dec 21, 2012 9:07:14 GMT -5
He signed legislation that would allow guns in national parks for one. He also repealed a law banning guns on amtrak trains. Look it up. Hope I spelled everything correctly so wish can understand.
|
|