Gun Hypocrisy

[kb01]

I always cringe when I hear the term "assault weapon"; it's a purely politically motivated word, designed to create inherent bias and doesn't do anything to facilitate discussion. It's impossible to tell if the person is talking about the criteria of the '94 AWB or is talking about all semi-automatic, magazine-fed rifles.

With that same logic, every scoped rifle is a "sniper rifle" and all pistols are "Saturday Night Specials".

 

[The_Jake]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Miller88
As a NY'er ... I'm very upset by this whole thing. The first think any dictator and facist government does is disarm the population. I'm leaving it at that.


If I lived in NY, I would, for the first time in my life, fail to comply with the law...


I would just move. Take away Cuomo's tax base and he will cease to exist. I won't live in a heavy gun controlled State. Too dangerous.

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: salv
Assault weapons are defined more by their purpose than their actual function or caliber.
The real idea behind banning assault weapons is to prevent the average citizen from posessing the same tactical advantages as law enforcement or the military.
Home defense is not a combat scenario, requiring a military style firearm. Home defense requires a short range firearm that is easy for an untrained operator to point, shoot, and disable an intruder. A short barrel 12 gauge makes much more sense than an AR. You are more likely to hit your target at 50 feet with 9 pellets of 00 buck than one round of .223.
Define "assault weapon". Seems "semiauto target pistol" is on the banned list. Having a CIB, I don't need YOU to tell ME what I "need".

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: BISCUT
Sir,

This is a decision that I will make for myself not the goovernment for me. And I am very well trained in both AR-15 and shotgun platoforms (LE instructor for both) and protecting me and mine is an AR. BTW a "short barreled" (18" and under) is and has been illegal in NYS since 1994. Some states allow a SBS with approprate NFA tax stamp and passing cetain background checks.

I'd suggest some knowledge prior to making assumptions concerning smaller caliber/short range firearms. Last testing done by Northeast SP showed 9mm "short barrel" out of H&K MP5 penetrated more wallboard than did 55gr SGK LE (Federal) out of a 14.5 barreled AR-15.

"Disable" and intruder?? In your attempt to "disable" an intuder it will often be YOU who ends up killed or "disabled."
Shoot to disable??? Aim for the center of mass. Juries don't like it when you shoot the perp in each eye, they understand "I was afraid for my life and fired the whole 'clip'".

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: Shannow

A bullet resistant vest (as worn by our PM during the "debate") is a prohibited weapon, and subject to 2 years in jail for possession.

Interesting that the absolute epitome of self defence can be a "prohibited weapon"



Because so many people have been killed by a defensive device

Spazdog, you are so stupid...they could use it in a crime and be invincible to all efforts to stop them....

for that inevitible response, I give you Ron White:
Quote:
One time I was watching a shootout live on CNN, and it went on so long that eventually the criminal shot himself. And the cops are complaining by saying, "He's got on body armor, he's got on body armor." And I thinking, "I can see his head. Shoot him in the [expletive] head."

Furthermore, body armor does not make you invincible. It'll stop center mass hits from penetrating on some calibers but you are still getting the energy from that hit. You gotta be pretty doped up to not feel that. And in that case, with enough 'dust or other narcotic in his system, a vital organ hit won't stop him anyway. Body armor just keeps it from being a fatality further on down the line so you can prosecute the idiot and then execute him properly by lethal injection. (at least in my state)

 

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
No it was not pistols check link above re. Times article. It is really hard to find out details about stuff like this so we make it up to enhance our point

More like the media does a terrible job at putting out reliable information in their quest to "be the first" and sensationalize happenings for ratings.

What that article clearly shows is that the slayer decided to take his own life as soon as someone else with a gun showed up.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
No it was not pistols check link above re. Times article. It is really hard to find out details about stuff like this so we make it up to enhance our point


I read the article that you linked.

Nowhere does it say what the shooter actually used to commit his heinous crime. He carried a bushmaster, he carried a Sig and a Glock...but instead of addressing his pschosis, his use of psychotropic drugs, his illegal insider access to school, his felony theft of weapons, his murder of his very own mother and the facts of the shooting...

Let's just focus on his rifle...and then use emotional and inaccurate words to describe that rifle...

I am not the one making up facts here, just calling it like it is...would everyone feel better if he used a hunting rifle? A .30 caliber one, that would have killed more than the .22 caliber one he used? Would we ban hunting rifles then?

No one opposed this guy, he could reload at will, as often as he liked, so magazine capacity had nothing to do with his effectiveness. He was able to commit a heinous set of crimes because he had no moral impediment to mass murder, he was crazy, he chose to ignore the multitude of laws about guns and schools, he stole the guns used in this act and he chose to kill little children.

And in all that, you want to focus on his rifle...just his rifle...not why he did it, not the failure of his pschological treatment, not the failure of society in allowing kids like him to become that disaffected, not the psychopathic ability to kill innocents, not the responsibility of a gun owner to secure their weapons, not the influence of SSRIs, not even the set of weapons he brought...

Just his rifle.

Sigh...

 

[BISCUT]

Superb AR builder John Noveske dies a few weeks ago at the agoe of about 35 in an auto accident. Some believe their is more too it but that is a whole nother story. Just prior to his death he posted a message on his Facebook acocunt detailing about 35 of the infamous shooting in the US beginning with Columbine.

There was a common link, and that common link was not the gun as the guns were very much varied. There was one link that was not varied -- each of the shooters was on Zoloft, Paxil, or Ritalin.

Hmmmmmm...Isn't that called a causal link?

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: Fleetmon
Shannon has it....a single-shot .45acp Liberator will be considered an assault weapon by today's definition.

I think the "web guards" deleted by last post....miller88 is absolutely correct....all of the "great" leaders of their day disarmed the masses before continuing with their true agenda....Hither, Stalin, Hussein, Kadhafi, Oh boy, etc, etc.....


Hitler didn't disarm the population.

As posted before : http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/

 

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: Trajan

Hitler didn't disarm the population.

As posted before : http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/


Quote:
The law did prohibit Jews and other persecuted classes from owning guns, but this should not be an indictment of gun control in general.

The person that wrote that article is a complete moron.

Hitler "only" used gun control to oppress the Jews but never mind that very inconvenient fact of history....???

Anti-gun logic at its best.

And that article has been fairly well debunked here:
http://www.examiner.com/article/hitler-s-gun-control-lie-debunked

 

[Fleetmon]

If Hitler disarmed any segment of the population that could have, prior to his regime, legally owned a firearm, then it is considered gun control.

What would it be called in the United States if nobody could own firearms EXCEPT military or police persons? Or whites? Or blacks? Or people with blue cars? Or those that only use PP oil? IT IS CALLED GUN CONTROL!!!!

I did notice that even Hitler knew enough to call them assault RIFLES not assault weapons like the uneducated goofs running this country and their followers insist on calling almost anything that is black in color, holds more than 10 rounds of ammo, has a pistol grip, and, in their feeble opinions, anything that "frightens" them.

I'm all for assault weapon bans......bats, bricks, sticks, rocks, and etc, etc, etc. Just don't get the idea you're going to take MY rifles....nope! Ain't gonna happen. Luckily for me, I only own one weapon which resides on my hip...the rest are innocent firearms incapable of harming anyone until I task one to do otherwise. This administration can create all the "Executive Orders" they want but they're not the ones that may, ultimately, have to chase down family members and friends.

There's no reason to think that the current administration is doing the right thing with ordering stricter gun control....where did the American people prosper from the bank bail outs, automaker bail outs, and now, coming soon to a hospital near you, OBAMACARE? Seems to me the only people prospering are the one's that got us in trouble in the first place.

Back off so I can get down from my rant box! Geez!!!!

 

[ottotheclown]

Adam Lanza armed with a Bushmaster and two pistols with tons of ammunition, no that was not what I concentrated on it was what a 5 year old looked like after a Bushmaster was loaded on them. Can you imagine how the world must look at us?? If you could would you move to America???

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
No it was not pistols check link above re. Times article. It is really hard to find out details about stuff like this so we make it up to enhance our point


I read the article that you linked.

Nowhere does it say what the shooter actually used to commit his heinous crime. He carried a bushmaster, he carried a Sig and a Glock...but instead of addressing his pschosis, his use of psychotropic drugs, his illegal insider access to school, his felony theft of weapons, his murder of his very own mother and the facts of the shooting...

Let's just focus on his rifle...and then use emotional and inaccurate words to describe that rifle...

I am not the one making up facts here, just calling it like it is...would everyone feel better if he used a hunting rifle? A .30 caliber one, that would have killed more than the .22 caliber one he used? Would we ban hunting rifles then?

No one opposed this guy, he could reload at will, as often as he liked, so magazine capacity had nothing to do with his effectiveness. He was able to commit a heinous set of crimes because he had no moral impediment to mass murder, he was crazy, he chose to ignore the multitude of laws about guns and schools, he stole the guns used in this act and he chose to kill little children.

And in all that, you want to focus on his rifle...just his rifle...not why he did it, not the failure of his pschological treatment, not the failure of society in allowing kids like him to become that disaffected, not the psychopathic ability to kill innocents, not the responsibility of a gun owner to secure their weapons, not the influence of SSRIs, not even the set of weapons he brought...

Just his rifle.

Sigh...

 

[Astro14]

Otto - again, nowhere in that article does it say what of the 3 weapons that psychotic used on the children.

I've carried the M-4 (the dreaded assault rifle...though it's actually a carbine...and even the one I carried was limited to 3 rounds in auto mode). I know what a .223 round does. I know what a 9mm does.

I've never been safer than when among literally hundreds of folks who were carrying an "assault weapon" and a "high capacity" pistol...both with high capacity magazines (only dorks call them "clips"...they're magazines).

If we, as a society, fail to address WHY he did this then adding more laws won't make the next psycho (who doesn't care about laws either) any less able to commit the same atrocity.

I lived near Denver when Columbine happened. Dylan and Kleibold broke 17 state and federal laws on the commission of their crime. Why does anyone think that law 18 or 19 will make a difference?

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted By: salv
Assault weapons are defined more by their purpose than their actual function or caliber.
The real idea behind banning assault weapons is to prevent the average citizen from posessing the same tactical advantages as law enforcement or the military.
Home defense is not a combat scenario, requiring a military style firearm. Home defense requires a short range firearm that is easy for an untrained operator to point, shoot, and disable an intruder. A short barrel 12 gauge makes much more sense than an AR. You are more likely to hit your target at 50 feet with 9 pellets of 00 buck than one round of .223.

If someone is in my house uninvited it's sure going to be a "combat scenario." Please explain how police work of getting Joe Criminal out of my house is any different than me getting Joe Criminal out of my house. Other than the police will have backup and body armor and be able to assess the situation from a distance. But somehow I don't need what they need.

That's another thing that's stupid about the "hicap" mag bans. Carrying extra mags for the civilian is a pain so it's nice to be able to carry a fair amount of rounds in one mag. But of course if I was planning to shoot up somewhere I'm going to make sure to stuff my pockets with extra mags. Even 10 rounders. If you didn't think about this, one 15 round mag has less rounds than two 10 round mags. Penalize the good guy some more.

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
(Reno, NV) — Officials say a man who carjacked a Nevada Highway Patrol car and another vehicle in northern Nevada killed himself with the trooper’s shotgun.

NHP says a trooper had stopped a Ford Explorer with Florida plates about 4 p.m. Monday on Interstate 80 at Mustang. Officials say one of the four occupants left the vehicle and stole the trooper’s car.

Authorities say other officers started chasing the stolen cruiser and disabled it by shooting out the tires. The suspect then got out of the patrol car and carjacked a Pontiac Grand Prix.

NHP says the suspect eventually crashed the Grand Prix. Troopers say he got out and started shooting into the air before turning the gun on himself.

He was pronounced dead at the scene.

http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2013/01/29/man-steals-nhp-troopers-gun-kills-self/

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: hatt


That's another thing that's stupid about the "hicap" mag bans. Carrying extra mags for the civilian is a pain so it's nice to be able to carry a fair amount of rounds in one mag. But of course if I was planning to shoot up somewhere I'm going to make sure to stuff my pockets with extra mags. Even 10 rounders. If you didn't think about this, one 15 round mag has less rounds than two 10 round mags. Penalize the good guy some more.


Funny thing; I never had to qualify with the M16 in the Army. Armored Crewman do not need to. We have to qualify with pistol, grenade, submachine gun and crew served weapons (the tank itself) but not the M16. But we did familiarize with it.
The Armorer specifically told us, "Do not put 20 rounds in the magazine. Stop loading at 18." If you drew a 30 round magazine, do not use it."

I never asked. This was one particular Sergeant that did not look like he wanted to entertain questions as to why we should not load 20 into the magazines.
Pistol Combat range qualification? "Load 15 in each magazine of the Beretta M9 Pistol, Semiautomatic, 9mm..." Load it 'til it's full. (range safety rules prevented you from chambering a round before the range went live)
Submachine gun range? Stuff 30 in each magazine of the M3, Submachine gun, caliber .45ACP.

But not the M16A2

 

[ridgerunner]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
No it was not pistols check link above re. Times article. It is really hard to find out details about stuff like this so we make it up to enhance our point


I read the article that you linked.

Nowhere does it say what the shooter actually used to commit his heinous crime. He carried a bushmaster, he carried a Sig and a Glock...but instead of addressing his pschosis, his use of psychotropic drugs, his illegal insider access to school, his felony theft of weapons, his murder of his very own mother and the facts of the shooting...

Let's just focus on his rifle...and then use emotional and inaccurate words to describe that rifle...

I am not the one making up facts here, just calling it like it is...would everyone feel better if he used a hunting rifle? A .30 caliber one, that would have killed more than the .22 caliber one he used? Would we ban hunting rifles then?

No one opposed this guy, he could reload at will, as often as he liked, so magazine capacity had nothing to do with his effectiveness. He was able to commit a heinous set of crimes because he had no moral impediment to mass murder, he was crazy, he chose to ignore the multitude of laws about guns and schools, he stole the guns used in this act and he chose to kill little children.

And in all that, you want to focus on his rifle...just his rifle...not why he did it, not the failure of his pschological treatment, not the failure of society in allowing kids like him to become that disaffected, not the psychopathic ability to kill innocents, not the responsibility of a gun owner to secure their weapons, not the influence of SSRIs, not even the set of weapons he brought...

Just his rifle.

Sigh...


Very well stated! Thank U.

 

[ottotheclown]

You are right not saying which one instead the purpose of the article was to point out the life long horror police will go through seeing the carnage. If you follow this story you will find the Bushmaste was used. The purpose was to point out what it was like saying if you have children do not go in there.

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Otto - again, nowhere in that article does it say what of the 3 weapons that psychotic used on the children.

I've carried the M-4 (the dreaded assault rifle...though it's actually a carbine...and even the one I carried was limited to 3 rounds in auto mode). I know what a .223 round does. I know what a 9mm does.

I've never been safer than when among literally hundreds of folks who were carrying an "assault weapon" and a "high capacity" pistol...both with high capacity magazines (only dorks call them "clips"...they're magazines).

If we, as a society, fail to address WHY he did this then adding more laws won't make the next psycho (who doesn't care about laws either) any less able to commit the same atrocity.

I lived near Denver when Columbine happened. Dylan and Kleibold broke 17 state and federal laws on the commission of their crime. Why does anyone think that law 18 or 19 will make a difference?

 

[morris]

i am tired of hearing GUN VIOLENCE. it is not GUN violance. it is PEOPLE violance. that gun did NOT deiced to fire.

 

[ottotheclown]

I love this:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/30/1183256/-Stephen-Colbert-talks-about-states-trying-to-nullify-any-new-federal-gun-laws