the worst of liberalism

apple0154 said:
The right to bear arms comes from the creator?
Click to expand...

Actually, whether the rights come from the US Constitution or from the Creator matters little. The fact that the US Constitution lists the right to bear arms as one of our fundamental rights, which ever source you believe, it is a right not to be taken from the people.
 
WinterBorn said:
Actually, whether the rights come from the US Constitution or from the Creator matters little. The fact that the US Constitution lists the right to bear arms as one of our fundamental rights, which ever source you believe, it is a right not to be taken from the people.
Click to expand...
I'd say it matters a great deal. The idea behind the BOR of the Constitution is that these rights are inherent and were present before being written.
 
King of Guns said:
I never claimed that reforming the treatment of the mentally is was without merit. I simply stated that since Kennedy ended the institutionalization of the mentally ill, homelessness and mass shootings have risen dramatically without a corresponding rise in other elements. And you've yet to define an assault weapon, or illustrate how they are different or why they should be regulated. You've also failed to refute my presumption that you're all for the police regulating everything in your life.
Click to expand...

The ignorant polarized argument AGAIN? REALLY??? WTF is wrong with you?

Polarized Thinking (false choice, dichotomy, primal thinking, false dilemma, black and white thinking): This is the fallacy of thinking that things are either black or white, good or bad, all or nothing. This fallacy can lead to rigid and harmful rules based on primal thinking when it is efficient to compress complex information into simplistic categories for rapid decision making during times of stress, conflict, or threat. Polarized thinking can also lead to unhelpful forms of perfectionism. The reality often lies in the sizable middle ground between these extreme poles.
 
WinterBorn said:
Yes they were. No one is saying that a "slippery slope" or incrementalism cannot be stopped. But it is much harder to stop the longer it goes on.

The "Assault weapons ban" was a crock of manure from the beginning. But it took more effort, and more power higher up, to repeal it than it would have taken to stop it.
Click to expand...

Really? Because you right wingers say so?

* FACT: New magazines containing more than 10 rounds were banned under the Federal Assault Weapons Act, but Congress did not renew the law in 2004, despite widespread support from over 70% of Americans. Now only 6 states and D.C. limit the capacity of magazines.

Please tell me why anyone would oppose this bill?

Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act

On January 8, nineteen people, including U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and U.S. District Court Judge John Roll, were shot outside a Tucson, Arizona grocery store with a handgun equipped with a large capacity ammunition magazine.

U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy has introduced H.R. 308, Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act to prohibit civilian possession of these military style magazines. Senator Frank Lautenberg has introduced S.32 in the Senate.

Large capacity ammunition magazines are designed to enable shooting mass numbers of people quickly and efficiently without reloading. They are not useful for hunting or self-defense.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/
 
Last edited:
Bfgrn said:
Really? Because you right wingers say so?

* FACT: New magazines containing more than 10 rounds were banned under the Federal Assault Weapons Act, but Congress did not renew the law in 2004, despite widespread support from over 70% of Americans. Now only 6 states and D.C. limit the capacity of magazines.

Please tell me why anyone would oppose this bill?

Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act

On January 8, nineteen people, including U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and U.S. District Court Judge John Roll, were shot outside a Tucson, Arizona grocery store with a handgun equipped with a large capacity ammunition magazine.

U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy has introduced H.R. 308, Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act to prohibit civilian possession of these military style magazines. Senator Frank Lautenberg has introduced S.32 in the Senate.

Large capacity ammunition magazines are designed to enable shooting mass numbers of people quickly and efficiently without reloading. They are not useful for hunting or self-defense.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/
Click to expand...

And do you know how easy it is to reload a semi-automatic? Do you think fewer people would have died if his magazine would have held fewer rounds?


Prior to the "assault weapon" ban, weapons fitting the vague criteria of an "assault rifle" were responsible for roughly 0.5% of gun crimes. During the ban, the rate went to 0.5% of gun crimes. And since the repeal it has jumped to 0.5% of gun crime.

In other words, it was a worthless piece of regulation.




You fear the guns. A gun, in and of itself, is harmless.
 
Bfgrn said:
The ignorant polarized argument AGAIN? REALLY??? WTF is wrong with you?

Polarized Thinking (false choice, dichotomy, primal thinking, false dilemma, black and white thinking): This is the fallacy of thinking that things are either black or white, good or bad, all or nothing. This fallacy can lead to rigid and harmful rules based on primal thinking when it is efficient to compress complex information into simplistic categories for rapid decision making during times of stress, conflict, or threat. Polarized thinking can also lead to unhelpful forms of perfectionism. The reality often lies in the sizable middle ground between these extreme poles.
Click to expand...

I would think you blaming the death of a child on the availability of high capacity magazines would fit the description you posted.
 
Bfgrn said:
The ignorant polarized argument AGAIN? REALLY??? WTF is wrong with you?

Polarized Thinking (false choice, dichotomy, primal thinking, false dilemma, black and white thinking): This is the fallacy of thinking that things are either black or white, good or bad, all or nothing. This fallacy can lead to rigid and harmful rules based on primal thinking when it is efficient to compress complex information into simplistic categories for rapid decision making during times of stress, conflict, or threat. Polarized thinking can also lead to unhelpful forms of perfectionism. The reality often lies in the sizable middle ground between these extreme poles.
Click to expand...
You've yet to provide me with any indication that you believe differently. You've also repeatedly and deliberately avoided answering any sort of question pertaining to how my scenario is different than the one you endorse.
 
Bfgrn said:
Really? Because you right wingers say so?

* FACT: New magazines containing more than 10 rounds were banned under the Federal Assault Weapons Act, but Congress did not renew the law in 2004, despite widespread support from over 70% of Americans. Now only 6 states and D.C. limit the capacity of magazines.

Please tell me why anyone would oppose this bill?

Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act

On January 8, nineteen people, including U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and U.S. District Court Judge John Roll, were shot outside a Tucson, Arizona grocery store with a handgun equipped with a large capacity ammunition magazine.

U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy has introduced H.R. 308, Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act to prohibit civilian possession of these military style magazines. Senator Frank Lautenberg has introduced S.32 in the Senate.

Large capacity ammunition magazines are designed to enable shooting mass numbers of people quickly and efficiently without reloading. They are not useful for hunting or self-defense.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/
Click to expand...
Lulz. SO MANY LULZ. You're citing the BRADY CAMPAIGN? But if I were to cite the NRA, that'd just be right wing propaganda wouldn't it?

So if these type of magazines are ineffective in self defense, why do police carry them? Where is the poll/study that shows the "70% of Americans in support of it". That's a pretty hard statistic to believe, as around 40% of Americans are gun owners, and the AR15 rifle is the MOST OWNED RIFLE in America these days.
 
Bfgrn said:
Please tell me why anyone would oppose this bill?
Click to expand...
Because it unnecessarily restricts my constitutional rights, makes me and others more vulnerable to both personal and governmental oppression, and in no way would stop any sort of crime whatsoever, in addition to creating a black market for high capacity magazines (which I would be a large part of).
 
King of Guns said:
Because it unnecessarily restricts my constitutional rights, makes me and others more vulnerable to both personal and governmental oppression, and in no way would stop any sort of crime whatsoever, in addition to creating a black market for high capacity magazines (which I would be a large part of).
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
King of Guns, let me derail this temporarily......

Have you done any shooting with a .270WSM? I like the idea of the short magnums, and I love the .277 round. I am looking for a new deer rifle, and some friends have recommended it as the caliber I should try.
 
WinterBorn said:
King of Guns, let me derail this temporarily......

Have you done any shooting with a .270WSM? I like the idea of the short magnums, and I love the .277 round. I am looking for a new deer rifle, and some friends have recommended it as the caliber I should try.
Click to expand...
I've never shot it personally, but heard nothing ill about it other than the lack of availability for ammo. Personally if I wanted another 270 caliber rifle, I'd get one in the 6.8SPC. Far less recoil than either the 270 or 270 WSM, roughly same price, and very useful on deer. And ammo is more available than the WSM. But if you're dead-set on the magnum, it'll do you good, I just don't see a practical need for it with southern game.
 
King of Guns said:
I've never shot it personally, but heard nothing ill about it other than the lack of availability for ammo. Personally if I wanted another 270 caliber rifle, I'd get one in the 6.8SPC. Far less recoil than either the 270 or 270 WSM, roughly same price, and very useful on deer. And ammo is more available than the WSM. But if you're dead-set on the magnum, it'll do you good, I just don't see a practical need for it with southern game.
Click to expand...

I have been looking at a .270 Win again. That is probably what I will go with. But I thought I'd ask if you had any experience with the new round.
 
WinterBorn said:
I have been looking at a .270 Win again. That is probably what I will go with. But I thought I'd ask if you had any experience with the new round.
Click to expand...
Basically the WSM line was built to provide magnum power in short rifle actions. The shorter the action, the stiffer it is, and theoretically the more accurate it is. I love the 270, but for most of the things I use it for, the 6.8 is just as good and a little easier on the shoulder/wrist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top