Obama a Threat to Gun Owners

[VirusType2]

I'm going to shoot a home invader with the highest caliber handgun as near to me as possible.

You know you can't shoot them if they are attempting to flee. You can't shoot them in the back either, or it's not self defense.

And if someone's OUTSIDE on my property attempting to steal a vehicle I'm obviously going to choose to come outside with a .223 or 30 ott 6 over a 380

Then, by law, you'd be a murderer. You can't shoot someone outside your home who isn't attempting to harm others.

By law, you can't shoot them because they are stealing your car.

Depends on the situation. The car situation depends on other factors as well like on your property or not.

It doesn't say 'property' it says 'in your home' Your front yard (or wherever you keep your car) is not 'in your home'

Note: the term "home" is used because most states only apply their Castle Doctrine to a place of residence; however, some states extend the protection to other legally-occupied places such as automobiles and places of business.

even fewer states cover automobiles and only if you occupy them. Do you live in your car RT? You don't have an Recreational Vehicle or camper do you? So unless you or your family were in your car with your gun and someone tried to steal it, then no, you don't have the right to kill them.

heres the answer youre looking for
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine

I suggest you actually read over that; ignorance of the law is no excuse to break it.


Here

use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.

Castle Doctrines are legislated by state, and not all states in the US have a Castle Doctrine.

Each state differs with respect to the specific instances in which the Castle Doctrine can be invoked, and what degree of retreat or non-deadly resistance (if any) is required before deadly force can be used.

You still have to present a reasonable and justifiable case in a court of law for using deadly force.

I mean you legally can shoot to wound but no person should ever do that, that's sick IMO

What on earth?

Obviously yes as in I would shoot to kill. If you think that it is acceptable to ever shoot someone just to WOUND them you are mistaken. That is ****ed up. The only time you should be inflicting a devastating wound like a gunshot is when your intent is for the person to be killed, not to just hurt them. Would you shoot an animal "just to wound?" if so thats sick and ****ed up.

Police officers do it every day. And no it's not sick and messed up - you are.

They only shoot to kill if stopping a criminal is imperative. They won't shoot someone for attempting to steal a car. They shoot someone to kill only if someone's life is threatened.

The only exceptions to this civil immunity are generally situations of excessive force, where the shooter fired on a subdued, cooperative, or disabled assailant. A situation meeting this exception generally invalidates the criminal "castle defense" as well. In addition, someone who fires in self-defense is still liable for any damages or injuries to third parties who were not acting criminally at the time of the shooting.

Many of the states that support similar laws have a 'duty to retreat' clause:

any state that imposes a duty to retreat while in the home does not have a "Castle law": the duty-to-retreat clause expressly imposes an obligation upon the home's occupants to retreat as far as possible and verbally announce their intent to use deadly force, before they can be legally justified in doing so to defend themselves.

It's not awesome to kill somebody but I'm not going to let someone steal my car and possibly my identity with what's inside the car. Don't want the threat of dying then dont come onto property to steal.

Then spend your life in jail for murder and think about how stupid and wrong you were every day.

Your type is probably the reason why Obama would want assault weapons banned.

fixed, and I agree. I don't think R.Temjin should be allowed to have guns. He has already sternly and repeatedly admitted that he would murder someone unjustly, without good cause.

 

[Ridge]

It varies from state to state...in Texas if you are in your car and someone pulls a gun on you, you can drop them...its been tested in court and the guy in the car was acquitted...

Colorado has a neutered version called the Make My Day Law...

 

[VirusType2]

It varies from state to state...in Texas if you are in your car and someone pulls a gun on you, you can drop them...its been tested in court and the guy in the car was acquitted...

Isn't that what I said? Yes.

Please read the whole thing if you want to discuss interpretation.

Also, Rakurai did not describe such a situation.

He described coming outside to shoot someone dead for attempting to steal his vehicle.

 

[Eejit]

Human life is worthless, amirite?!

ffs RT is you can't see the difference between shooting to wound an animal and shooting to wound a human you belong in prison before you ****ing kill somebody for bumping into you on the street ("I thought he waz stealing mai wallet and identitai!!").

 

[Cormeh]

Obama a threat to gun owners? Just bust a cap in his ass!

 

[Saturos]

Obama is not a threat to guns. More BS propaganda.

This is why I don't care to follow politics anymore. So much BS, so little truth.

 

[Eejit]

Yes, I do. I could say "you don't really need freedom of speech" because to put it bluntly you literally don't, but it's against Freedom to support such a stance. There is no first amendment without the second.

He's right you know.
No countries with gun control have freedom of speech.

 

[TwwIX]

I wonder what he would think of these weapons if one or more of his family members got killed senselessly by a fellow Gun Owner.

 

[Kakashi]

I have a job family and no interest in joining the military or going to war, don't be ridiculous. "Assault weapon" is a term used to classify firearms solely based on looks. I'm serious too, look at what defines an Assault Weapon in the old assault weapons ban.


Folding stock
Conspicuous pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

Do you not see a problem with these? For instance, the GRENADE LAUNCHER. Why in the hell would ANYBODY need any of this equipment? Assault weapons should be continued to be banned. There is absolutely no reason why anyone would need of these types of weapons and modifications.

Do you imagine the country with people carrying assault weapons? That's just ridiculous, that's giving criminals more reason to commit more act of gun smuggling, robbery, and more.

I agree that people may need weapons, but just a pistol if anything else, and of course for hunting. But anything other then that is just not needed in this country. Look at other countries with gun bans, looks to me that their doing fine for themselves.

Having guns around just makes our country a lot worse to live in. How many times you do see someone getting gunned down in the news?

Children and Gun Violence
In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5 times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)

America and Gun Violence
American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)

Guns in the Wrong Hands
Faulty records enable terrorists, illegal aliens and criminals to purchase guns. Over a two and a half-year period, at least 9,976 convicted felons and other illegal buyers in 46 states obtained guns because of inadequate records. (Broken Records, Americans for Gun Safety Foundation)

Source

These are just simply amazing, awful statistics.

 

[Llama]

So in this thread we've established that shooting someone in the thigh to wound them is an evil, evil act, but shooting them in the head is ok?

Right, that makes sense.

Hey RT, pass me some of whatever you're smoking, that shit must be awesome.

 

[Kase]

Yes, I do. I could say "you don't really need freedom of speech"

Freedom of Speech isnt the same as owning a gun

 

[Hectic Glenn]

Then, by law, you'd be a murderer. You can't shoot someone outside your home who isn't attempting to harm others.

By law, you can't shoot them because they are stealing your car.

It doesn't say 'property' it says 'in your home' Your front yard (or wherever you keep your car) is not 'in your home'

The fact the OP doesn't know this worries me. The fact he feels he has the obligation to go outside his home and kill someone breaking into his car and feels it's acceptable to take a life. It worries me greatly, that if this happened yesterday he would have taken a life.

The OP also said he wants to protect his family from harm. Is walking outside the front of your house with a loaded handgun pointing it at some joyriding kid bringing safety to your home? Or are you forcing this persons hand to draw his own weapon and start a gun fight in your street? If you are shooting to kill, I'm sure he would be too. You'll put your whole family at risk, it's a ridiculous thing to do.

I mean you legally can shoot to wound but no person should ever do that, that's sick IMO

Perhaps there is no point reasoning with you if you believe this. Honestly...I don't know what to say to that. I have...no...idea.

 

[Vigilante]

I really wish you would stop posting all this false shit in here.

BTW, I AM a gun owner and am not worried in the least what will happen to them under Obama.

 

[Ravioli]

lol @ americans getting upset over their little toys that determine the size of their dicks.

 

[CptStern]

rakurai this is what your alarmist nonsense (and those like you who push bullshit propaganda) does to people


http://www.wkyt.com/home/headlines/33513019.html


hope republicans/conservatives are happy by how some in your little group behave like ****ing retarded animals

 

[Ridge]

Why is it that a flash supressor or a bayonet mount makes a rifle an assault weapon? The flash hider protects the shooter's eyes from the flash, it doesnt make the flash disappear so someone can hide in the bushes and shoot people to their heart's content...it redirects the blast.

A bayonet mount? Its a knife, on the end of a gun...why not ban knives?

A folding stock? AR-15 stock doesnt fold, yet it still makes it an assault weapon??

A conspicuous pistol grip?? WTF is that, anyway!? Why are they evil? Police shotguns have pistol grips...what is so wrong about a rifle having an ergonomic way to handle it?

Grenade launcher? Prohibitively expensive anyway...now a flare or smoke launcher can be had for a few hundred dollars...

But still, the majority of these bans were written by Carolyn McCarthy and James Brady, both of which had thier lives affected by handguns (Brady shot while protecting President Reagan, and McCarthy's husband and son shot with a 9mm at a train station) So why ban rifles?

 

[huntingbear]

lol @ americans getting upset over their little toys that determine the size of their dicks.

lol at foreigners who think making fun of americans is funny and makes you tough...it really hurts my feelings everytime i hear a foreigner say something like "fat americans" or "stupid americans" because i for one feel i'm being misrepresented by the dumb hicks that make it onto TV news and stuff....*cries*

 

[huntingbear]

Why is it that a flash supressor or a bayonet mount makes a rifle an assault weapon? The flash hider protects the shooter's eyes from the flash, it doesnt make the flash disappear so someone can hide in the bushes and shoot people to their heart's content...it redirects the blast.

A bayonet mount? Its a knife, on the end of a gun...why not ban knives?

A folding stock? AR-15 stock doesnt fold, yet it still makes it an assault weapon??

A conspicuous pistol grip?? WTF is that, anyway!? Why are they evil? Police shotguns have pistol grips...what is so wrong about a rifle having an ergonomic way to handle it?

Grenade launcher? Prohibitively expensive anyway...now a flare or smoke launcher can be had for a few hundred dollars...

But still, the majority of these bans were written by Carolyn McCarthy and James Brady, both of which had thier lives affected by handguns (Brady shot while protecting President Reagan, and McCarthy's husband and son shot with a 9mm at a train station) So why ban rifles?

for the same reason jack thompson wants to ban video games...simply because HE doesn't like them and no one else should enjoy them.
I read that after the AWB expired there was no jump in gun violence like you would think there would be so imho it doesn't work...so why reinstate it?
Even if it does get reinstated I'm sure we'll still be able to enjoy our Rock River Arms M-4 and our Bushmaster ACR...i hope anyway.

 

[Ridge]

They might be grandfathered in, or they might not....I think it'd be harder to pass one without a grandfather clause because there would be more public outrage over having our weapons taken away with no compensation...

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

The fact the OP doesn't know this worries me. The fact he feels he has the obligation to go outside his home and kill someone breaking into his car and feels it's acceptable to take a life. It worries me greatly, that if this happened yesterday he would have taken a life.

The OP also said he wants to protect his family from harm. Is walking outside the front of your house with a loaded handgun pointing it at some joyriding kid bringing safety to your home? Or are you forcing this persons hand to draw his own weapon and start a gun fight in your street? If you are shooting to kill, I'm sure he would be too. You'll put your whole family at risk, it's a ridiculous thing to do.


Perhaps there is no point reasoning with you if you believe this. Honestly...I don't know what to say to that. I have...no...idea.

What's also scary is that he's definitely not alone in his sentiment. It's not uncommon for people to express this kind of disregard for human life, especially in certain areas of the United States.

Kind of sucks that all of us often get pegged as feeling this way, though. I'm in the belief that we're moving away from these sorts of ideologies, in the long term.

 

[Ridge]

I believe I have the right to protect myself, my family and my property...however that doesnt mean I'll go out of my way to find a reason to off someone...

 

[CptStern]

for the same reason jack thompson wants to ban video games...simply because HE doesn't like them and no one else should enjoy them.
I read that after the AWB expired there was no jump in gun violence like you would think there would be so imho it doesn't work...so why reinstate it?.

this is absolutely retarded reasoning

Why is it that a flash supressor or a bayonet mount makes a rifle an assault weapon? The flash hider protects the shooter's eyes from the flash, it doesnt make the flash disappear so someone can hide in the bushes and shoot people to their heart's content...it redirects the blast.

A bayonet mount? Its a knife, on the end of a gun...why not ban knives?

A folding stock? AR-15 stock doesnt fold, yet it still makes it an assault weapon??

A conspicuous pistol grip?? WTF is that, anyway!? Why are they evil? Police shotguns have pistol grips...what is so wrong about a rifle having an ergonomic way to handle it?

Grenade launcher? Prohibitively expensive anyway...now a flare or smoke launcher can be had for a few hundred dollars...

those are discriptors to cover the bases for all assault rifles current and down the pipeline ..they cant get into specifics because any manufacturer could circumvent the law simply by modifing the weapon to conform with a specific standard

But still, the majority of these bans were written by Carolyn McCarthy and James Brady, both of which had thier lives affected by handguns (Brady shot while protecting President Reagan, and McCarthy's husband and son shot with a 9mm at a train station) So why ban rifles?

what does one incident have to do with another? you do realise his campaign used to be called Handgun Control Inc, right?


in any event please explain why a someone would need a gun with a baynot? or an assault rifle ...home defense? hardly, hunting ..not unless you plan on charging that poor defenceless deer with your bayonet



these is not a single logical reason why any of you should own the right to take someone's rights away. I dont trust you to do the right thing, having a weapon does not in my book give you an automatic "well he's responsible with a deadly weapon" pass ..in fact it's the opposite

I believe I have the right to protect myself, my family and my property

why because some ancient text twisted and purposefully misinterpreted to suit an agenda says so?

why does your right to protect supercede my right to keep my family safe from guns? legitimate gun owners facilitate illegal gun ownership ..your "right" perpetuates the taking of other people's rights/lives

 

[Ridge]

People hunt with a Remington 700...or a Mosin Nagant...or an SKS...those are all military rifles...lots of people hunt with AKs and ARs...

Maybe a bayonet mount because that is how they came, and they are a militaria collector? How about the M1 Garand? The gun that won WW2...that has a bayonet and mount...

The AK-47 was used by many former Soviet states and others and that contirbuted to the downfall of the Soviet Union...that has a bayonet...

Lee Enfield? Bayonet. Type 93? Bayonet

Do you know that the AK-47 is the ONLY weapon sold with a bayonet in the package nowadays? The AR-15 platform has bayonet mounts, but the majority of the owners that DO use the bayonet mount use it to mount a bipod for bench or prone shooting...

Besides, an assault rifle is supposed to fire full auto to mow down crowds, right? No full auto on them, and if the bad guy runs out of ammo and has to use the bayonet then that gives a legal firearms owner the chance to take him down and end the rampage...

Guns can be good or bad. It all depends on who uses them. Good guys with guns can stop bad guys with guns....if you pass laws making it illegal for the good guy to carry, then the bad guys can run unopposed...

When seconds count, a cop is only minutes away...

 

[CptStern]

People hunt with a Remington 700...or a Mosin Nagant...or an SKS...those are all military rifles...lots of people hunt with AKs and ARs...

Maybe a bayonet mount because that is how they came, and they are a militaria collector? How about the M1 Garand? The gun that won WW2...that has a bayonet and mount...

you keep saying you need guns toprotect your family ...how many hunters use this? how many people use it for home defense?

The AK-47 was used by many former Soviet states and others and that contirbuted to the downfall of the Soviet Union...that has a bayonet...

how many hunters use this? how many people use it for home defense?

Lee Enfield? Bayonet. Type 93? Bayonet

how many hunters use this? how many people use it for home defense?

Do you know that the AK-47 is the ONLY weapon sold with a bayonet in the package nowadays? The AR-15 platform has bayonet mounts, but the majority of the owners that DO use the bayonet mount use it to mount a bipod for bench or prone shooting...

which is what you want when hunting or for home defense

Besides, an assault rifle is supposed to fire full auto to mow down crowds, right? No full auto on them, and if the bad guy runs out of ammo and has to use the bayonet then that gives a legal firearms owner the chance to take him down and end the rampage...

how many hunters use this? how many people use it for home defense?

Guns can be good or bad. It all depends on who uses them. Good guys with guns can stop bad guys with guns....if you pass laws making it illegal for the good guy to carry, then the bad guys can run unopposed...

because there's no such thing as police officers, because criminals would easily get guns despite there being a handgun ban ..just like in Japan or Canada ..completely ineffectual legislation because canadian criminals are terrorising decent hard work canadians who are completely and utterly defenseless ...btw toronto, canada's largest city with a population of 4.5 million (including surrounding boroughs) has in and around 30 odd murders per year commited with handguns ..there isnt an american city that even comes close to this figure that is relatively the same size ( or a lot smaller) ...our city city in the US is Baltimore ..same size relatively speaking yet it has as much gun related murders as all of canada ..at 1/4 the population

When seconds count, a cop is only minutes away...

yes because out of all the countries in the world the US is the only country where the police are completely useless ...alarmist fearmongering to support a retarded agenda


oh you ignored every one of my points except the stupid bayonet one ...but I'm not going to let you off so easily, answer me this:

why does your right to protect supercede my right to keep my family safe from guns? legitimate gun owners facilitate illegal gun ownership ..your "right" perpetuates the taking of other people's rights/lives

to date no gun advocate has ever been able to explain why their right supercedes everyone elses

 

[Kakashi]

People hunt with a Remington 700...or a Mosin Nagant...or an SKS...those are all military rifles...lots of people hunt with AKs and ARs...

Maybe a bayonet mount because that is how they came, and they are a militaria collector? How about the M1 Garand? The gun that won WW2...that has a bayonet and mount...

The AK-47 was used by many former Soviet states and others and that contirbuted to the downfall of the Soviet Union...that has a bayonet...

Lee Enfield? Bayonet. Type 93? Bayonet

Do you know that the AK-47 is the ONLY weapon sold with a bayonet in the package nowadays? The AR-15 platform has bayonet mounts, but the majority of the owners that DO use the bayonet mount use it to mount a bipod for bench or prone shooting...

Besides, an assault rifle is supposed to fire full auto to mow down crowds, right? No full auto on them, and if the bad guy runs out of ammo and has to use the bayonet then that gives a legal firearms owner the chance to take him down and end the rampage...

Guns can be good or bad. It all depends on who uses them. Good guys with guns can stop bad guys with guns....if you pass laws making it illegal for the good guy to carry, then the bad guys can run unopposed...

When seconds count, a cop is only minutes away...

You have some horrible reasoning. Why would any hunter or even any civilian use any of those types of weapons? You even say yourself that they are in fact MILITARY WEAPONS. Do you plan to start up a war or something? Also, that 'Good guys vs. Bad guys' example is just down-right hilarious. We're living in reality here, where in the hell do you see this in real life? Let alone in the news? You are talking about gun fights in the streets more then anything else. This is the United States, this isn't a war zone.

If I recall right, I don't know any hunters who use any of those type of weapons for 'hunting'. Those are all elements of war. And no hunter would need an effing bayonet.

 

[Eejit]

Also, it's not as if hunting is imperative. It's little more than a hobby.

 

[Pesmerga]

I get this weird feeling Rakurai isn't going to be voting for Obama.

lol

 

[Eejit]

Shouldn't a mod fix the title to "Gun Ownership"?

 

[jverne]

hunting with AKs is utterly moronic...anyone who does that is probably a retarded hick.
an AK doesn't have a good accuracy compared to a scoped hunting rifle. hunting is about good shoot placement not by spraying a whole magazine in a poor whitetail.
you're an imbecile if you think AK and assault rifles should be used for that.




you know what would be cool...if the US bans every gun except flamethrowers hey somebody is breaking in my car...*woosh*...*fries the car and the burglar*

 

[Ridge]

Also, that 'Good guys vs. Bad guys' example is just down-right hilarious. We're living in reality here, where in the hell do you see this in real life? Let alone in the news? You are talking about gun fights in the streets more then anything else. This is the United States, this isn't a war zone.

'Disposable' AK-47s ? trend that worries cops

Henry Pierson Curtis | Sentinel Staff Writer
October 11, 2008

Orange County's latest murders reflect an alarming trend for law enforcement: urban firefights with dozens of shots fired.

The shooters in Tuesday night's double killing outside a Pine Hills apartment complex emptied two AK-47s into the victims and fled, discarding the assault rifles, two handguns and a shotgun.

"They just disposed of them like disposable cigarette lighters, I guess, because they're so easy to get," sheriff's homicide Detective Dave Clark said Friday. "I mean, it's really unusual for people to leave stuff like this behind."

Andre Patterson, 27, and Joshua Sharpe, 25, were shot repeatedly in the parking lot of Kensington Cottages apartments on Burroughs Drive off Hiawassee Road. Crime-scene technicians found 58 cartridges fired by the AK-47s and an undisclosed number from the other firearms.

One of the AK-47s had a 30-shot magazine. The other had a 40-shot magazine. Both had been fired until empty.

"We've come across something like this on three or four occasions this year with multiple weapons," said homicide Sgt. Allen Lee. "Just a couple of weeks ago when those [five] people got shot in Apopka, there were at least three different bursts of gunfire while we were there. And there were at least four to nine shots each time."

Crimes involving assault weapons have become so common that police officials across the nation are discussing how to contain the national problem, Sheriff Kevin Beary said this week. "We need to have a round-table with the Police Executive Research Foundation to get some answers," he said.

In the days since the double killing, detectives had learned that Patterson and Sharpe drove to the apartments to help a friend arguing with residents. The two groups clashed. Exactly why is still being investigated to identify the killers, Detective Brian Cross said.

The gunfight continued after deputies began arriving in patrol cars shortly after the 11:25 p.m. 911 call, according to interviews.

"They could have gotten hit," said Clark, noting patrol cars provide virtually no protection against assault rifles.

The victims' minivan and two other vehicles found in the parking lot had been hit by the gunfire. The bullets went through the doors, including a door post, and flattened a tire. The Sheriff's Office impounded the vehicles and confiscated the guns to examine them for clues.

Patterson had been arrested at least 13 times in Orange County on charges related to drugs, violence and firearms. Sharpe, known as "Booty," did not have a record in Orange County.

The killings -- the 55th and 56th in the unincorporated area of the county so far this year -- are being investigated with the help of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

So far, ATF agents based in Orlando discovered that one of the guns, a 9mm Sig-Sauer pistol, was stolen with 46 other firearms in a 2004 burglary of Shoot Straight- Casselberry, a Seminole County gun shop. One of the AK-47s shows likely signs of having been stolen because the serial number had been filed in an attempt to remove it, detectives said.

Henry Pierson Curtis can be reached at [email protected] or 407-420-5257.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/orl-shootout1108oct11,0,563660.story

Good thing criminals cant get guns...

 

[CptStern]

yes and why can they get guns?

I guess, because they're so easy to get,

WHO KNEW!!!!

 

[Ridge]

Yep, criminals in some cities can just go into a back alley and buy a rifle or a pistol from Johnny Two-Time for a few hundred dollars and then go to Wal*Mart for a box of ammo...

Meanwhile us people who are legitimate stand in line and wait for the background check to clear...

 

[CptStern]

Yep, criminals in some cities can just go into a back alley and buy a rifle or a pistol from Johnny Two-Time for a few hundred dollars and then go to Wal*Mart for a box of ammo...

Meanwhile us people who are legitimate stand in line and wait for the background check to clear...

where did Johnny Two-time get the pistol? ...and really do you think this is how the criminal underground works? you've been playing far too much Vampire: Bloodlines

 

[Ridge]

You didnt read in the article where it said the guns were stolen from law abiding owners, didja?

 

[TwwIX]

You didnt read in the article where it said the guns were stolen from law abiding owners, didja?

"Stolen" as in a jobless Gun Owner sold the gun illegally because he has to feed his family in this down spiraling economy. An economy which was caused by the Republican party,it's mumbling simian and their deregulatory shill,John McCain.
John McCain, a man who will fight for your gun rights and run this country even further down the shit hole. Oh yes, you will definitely need that M16 Rifle and then some, once this country falls and its people turn into savages. Vote McCain!

 

[CptStern]

You didnt read in the article where it said the guns were stolen from law abiding owners, didja?

actually I led you to make this response ...so, in essence if legal gun owners didnt have access to guns criminals wouldnt either AMIRITE? so out goes your notion that if guns were banned criminals would be the only ones with guns .....right?

 

[Eejit]

Nice self-ownage with that post there Ridge...

"They could have gotten hit," said Clark, noting patrol cars provide virtually no protection against assault rifles.

 

[leib10]

What we'll see happen, if anything, is a reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban. This ban was a piece of shit. I bought an AK47 (minus the flash hider :dozey right in the middle of this ban, and it was completely legal.

I really wouldn't mind a reinstatement of this ban as long as they leave the guns already in circulation alone (otherwise I'd lost about 6 assault rifles real fast!)

actually I led you to make this response ...so, in essence if legal gun owners didnt have access to guns criminals wouldnt either AMIRITE? so out goes your notion that if guns were banned criminals would be the only ones with guns .....right?

This notion is retarded. Criminals will ALWAYS have access to weapons. Period. No amount of gun control or restriction will ever, ever keep this from happening. You will be taking them out of the hands of citizens who do obey the law, and that hardly seems fair, does it? It's a typical liberal argument, one that might make sense at a first glance but has no bearing in the real world.

Take a look at Ciudad Juarez, a major city right across the border from my hometown. Literally hundreds of people have been shot there this year- this in a country that has outlawed firearms entirely.

 

[Eejit]

It's only criminals who'll be carrying assault weapons around with them.

 

[leib10]

It's only criminals who'll be carrying assault weapons around with them.

Not true. I own several, and I'm not a criminal. I have no intention of breaking the law, and certainly no intent to use any of them in a crime.