That gun control discussion again
More than 50 people were killed and hundreds were injured in Las Vegas last weekend, so now it’s time to have that one-sided discussion on gun control again. Mr Paddock, the shooter, confined himself to the gun laws in preparation for his dastardly deed, so now we have to hear all of the old canards about “gun show loopholes”, “universal background checks”, “silencers” and how the NRA is the root of all evil in the world.
First, Jimmy Kimmel, there is no “gun show loophole”. If you buy a gun from a licensed gun dealer at a gun show, you are still subjected to NCICS background checks. I know – I’ve bought two scary, black, semi-automatic guns at gun shows and went through background checks both times.
If you buy from an unlicensed seller, he won’t make you go through background checks, but he wouldn’t make you go through background checks if he sells the gun to you at his yard sale, either. The FBI interviewed criminals in prison about how they acquired their guns and less than 1% of them admitted that they bought the guns through private sales at gun shows.
On his show the other night, Kimmel said that 70% of Republicans want background checks. Of course they do, I want background checks. There are already universal background checks and I want that system to remain in place. I don’t want people with criminal backgrounds to own or possess guns. That’s easy.
What Kimmel and his crowd want as far a background checks is a NCICS check for private sales, because sales through a dealer are already subject to background checks. That will never happen. No one is going to drag their neighbor to a gun dealer and wait the half hour to go through checks when all they have to do hand over the gun in exchange for money. Neither is the guy who sells guns illegally to criminals out of the trunk of his car in a dark parking lot going to force them to go through NCICS. He doesn’t make them fill out the BATFE paperwork, either, nor does he keep a record of his sales.
Why are we even talking about so-called silencers? They don’t silence anything, except in the movies. They’re called suppressors for a reason.
And bump-stocks aren’t all that easy to fire accurately. Paddock probably killed a lot fewer people because he couldn’t aim well enough with his stupid bump stock. Think about it – how do you maintain a stable firing stance when the rifle jumps back-and-forth against your shoulder?
He fired at aviation fuel tanks near him and only hit the huge stationary targets twice. The only reason he was at all successful at causing casualties is because he was firing into a packed crowd of 22,000 people. He could have thrown rocks.
I could have created hundreds of casualties with one of my bolt-action rifles if I had 22,000 folks packed into a relatively small area a few hundred yards away.
The only way to have prevented Paddock from causing his massacre would be to outlaw all guns, and that’s really what the “gun control” crowd wants. He passed background checks, there’s nothing in his past that would justify denying guns to him, so the only solution is to forbid the sales of guns. That’s why we have the NRA to represent the millions of Americans in the halls of Congress who are members and who don’t, generally, commit crimes.
The media is back to their bullshit blaming bayonet lugs and grenade launcher mounts for mass killings. If you morons want to have a discussion on gun control, at least take the time to learn what it is that you’re discussing.
“Do something – anything” is not an effective plan to reduce gun crime.
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists
The sick f uk could have flown one of his airplanes into the fuel tanks or crowd and killed many more. Thank God he was incompetent.
Exactly….
How many subjects are there that we “need to have a a discussion on”?
All of them. There can be no sacred cows in a free society. Everything is up for debate.
Ok then, how about: Get off your lazy ass and go to work instead of drawing welfare?
Ozzie, you were a complete waste of my tax money. The school system failed you. I award you no points, and the world in general is stupider due to your mere existence.
And may God have mercy on his soul.
Scuzzie,
Liberty is -not- up for debate.
-Rights- are not up for debate.
-no- you may -not- impose your Jim Crow fantasies.
We need a discussion on how to get the media to stop gathering like vultures at a carrion feast, when these things happen.
EASY….stop voting for liberal, communist DUMOCRAPS!!
Well, you gotta admit that countries like Canada and Australia have very little gun crime. Could it be because of their strict gun control laws?
Let’s face it. No guns means no one to get shot with a gun. It’s not rocket science. It’s just how reality works.
And Australia’s crime rate is just as high as it was. They still have gun mass murders despite having severely limited guns, and as many total mass murders as they always have (except nowadays they have more arson mass murders. Which do you want, mass shooting or mass burning to death?) Now explain how you make sure there are no guns. Doesn’t work in China, Russia, etc… they still have criminals with guns – as do England and Australia. THAT is how reality works.
No trucks,no one gets run over. Yeah talking about jobs and responsibilities are sacred cows.
Apples/oranges for multiple reasons. Besides, even if all legally-owned weapons disappeared, this country would still be flooded with illegal guns and ammo. The black market that supplies most of the scumbags would be alive and well. It has plenty of demand, so it would find a supplier. The Red Chinese, for example, already make assloads of weaponry for export. They wouldn’t think twice about directly or indirectly supplying an American black market for small arms. The money would be there, and in the finest traditions of communism(/sarc), the Chinese would happily sell what they’re buying. They’re not the only ones, either. Our borders are porous as hell, and only something like 4% of shipping containers that cross them get opened for inspection of their contents, so importing them would be trivially easy. Hell, Pablo Escobar’s ghost would look at it and declare that he pursued the wrong line of work pushing drugs.
The islamofascists who shot up Paris not too long ago pulled their attack in a country whose gun laws make those of California, New York, and Hawaii look quite lenient by comparison. They obtained their automatic weapons and ammo in Belgium, whose laws are even stricter than those of France, and transported them across that nice open EU-style border they’re all so proud of without any hassle, and proceeded to go on a bloody rampage. Those laws didn’t do a damn thing other than ensure the victims couldn’t shoot back.
Nice try.
I guess ol’ Ozzie or Harriet, thinks the south of the border drug cartels would stop arming their gangs who run their drug operations and their illegal pot grows if we imitated the land down under.
“Well, you gotta admit that countries like Canada and Australia have very little gun crime.”
Always did.
“Could it be because of their strict gun control laws?”
No.
“No guns means no one to get shot with a gun.”
Not even the guy with the flame thrower that is about to roast you? Or your kid?
I believe Mexico has some very strict gun control laws.
Want to take a nice walk through Monterrey in the evening? No one is supposed to own guns there, so it is bound to be safe, right?
Idiot.
Ever see the videos of Mexican police helicopters lighting up Zetas with miniguns in residential neighborhoods, with plenty of tracers going both directions? Yeah, no thanks!
I have a friend who is a pastor in Monterrey.
His stories of his experiences are astounding.
Is Monterrey the place where cheese is made.?
That’s the other one, with one R.
Gee Ozzie, nobody ever thought of that before! You’re some kind of genius, ya know that? Let’s face it, you’re a troll and not even a good one.
Perhaps read “The Gulag Archipelago” again…you might have missed the part where the prisoners bemoan the reality they did nothing accept give away all of their personal liberty to the state and thus the state was able to arrest 1 out 4 citizens in some cities without any concern the citizenry could put up any viable resistance.
Free men and women don’t ask permission to bear arms.
An armed populace is the only one with the power to enforce its will on its government. Liberty is a state in which the government fears the people. Tyranny is a state in which the people fear the government.
“Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.”
—Benjamin Franklin
+100
Mexico has One gun store in the entire country (true). It is locked up on a military base and still has plenty of gun violence.
So that’s why Obama & Holder held Fast and Furious – in support of the free enterprise system!
Ozzie, You may be willing to forfeit your rights and freedoms for the illusion of safety but I for one am not.
So using your dumb logic, if you ban all guns then everyone who possesses a gun will turn it in. Including the criminals that illegally possess a firearm, because we all know that criminals with guns will abide by the gun laws and turn their scary guns in. Then we can all hug and sing kumbya with each other. I thought democratic politicians were stupid, but you take the cake.
So Ozzie, finding, rouding up, and deporting 12 (20) million illegals is crazy, because there’s no way we could get it done, but rounding up and confiscating over 300 million firearms is completely doable??? Just exactly what are you smoking??? How about we focus more on crime control (more people die on an average shitcago weekend than did in this event) instead of gun control, or other actions that would have no effect on preventing an attack like this… also, and here’s a crazy idea, how about we wait to see exactly what happened here, who else was involved, if this guy was in fact a radicalized muslim, etc. before we make a judgement on where we go from here… I know, lefties like you don’t do very well with facts, but maybe just this once, give it a try!
What is the date on this again? How long after the Aussie gun ban?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/incredible-footage-shows-ultimate-grand-11293019#ICID=OffSiteVideo
“Let’s face it. No guns means no one to get shot with a gun”. Would it make you feel better if they were pushed out of windows?
I actually suspect he thinks that gas chambers and ovens are more efficient.
Did y’all see that movie about the society where only the government and members of the ruling elite had guns? It was called “Schindler’s List.”
BULLSHYT! As soon as Australia collect the guns, the crime rate went through the roof…close your mouth and open a book!
It’s odd. This time around they seem to be focusing on security systems instead of gun grabbing which politicians are backing. Usually it’s “take guns!” but this time around there is a lot of “detectors” and “trackers” will work. Nothing is ever that simple with liberals and this has to be masking something they really want. Noticing oddities in the stock market in regards to this as well. OSIS for example. I don’t know, could be wrong, something feels off to me though.
Liberals want to be herds of sheep.
But don’t sheep get turned into mutton?
Lambchop.
Shepherd’s pie.
Haggis.
Rack of Lamb
Roast leg of lamb with mint jelly.
There are always conspiracy theories. The story as told by the MSM doesn’t completely pass the smell test. I am waiting as the authorities and not some lame reporter after a thorough investigation gives the actual account of who, what, why, and how.
Exactly!
And of course we get such delightful dialogue from the anti’s – such as Nancy Sinatra and whats-his-face Kimmel.
Steven Crowder and Ben Shapiro both reamed Kimmel’s ass brilliantly. The only problem with watching their videos is having to sit through repeated playbacks of Kimmel’s bullshit as they dismantle it point-by-point and call out the blatant lies.
“He aimed at fuel tanks” : My general problem with that concept is if he was an Aviator, the individual would likely know those tanks weren’t likely to explode (not an Aviator, just parsing information included in the link). It’s possible those were part of the uncontrolled action during firing. Too much data to know much at this point.
Any in the know concerning Fuel of this type want to enlighten me?
Unless the shooter was firing tracers, he’d likely do no more damage to a tank than make it leak. Liquid fuel does not burn.
M856 burns out at about 800m those tanks had to be further than that.
Besides, Mythbusters did a bit on setting Mogas on fire, it wasn’t ‘easy’
On further inspection, the closest tanks (that i could find) are at about 2100ft or 640m as measured from the ground, so within tracer distance. (note: the ‘true’ distance of flight would have been a trig function, i.e. the distance to the tank would have been less due to being about 320 feet up).
But my second comment stands, tracers would only increase the likelihood of a fire minimally.
Damnit. Distance would have been greater square root of y^2 plus x^2.
So, 640^2+220^2, sprout of so 670m.
I’ll go do pushups now.
One reason I don’t do math in public. I cannot do many pushups any more.
Being smart is a perishable skill, and I’m woefully out of practice.
While you are at it consider the reduced penetration of a tracer compared to a solid. Push away.
It’s been awhile, but IIRC, tracer rounds are very similar to standard ball. The main difference is that the tip of the tracer is dipped in a phosphorus compound. During the day, it leaves a slight smoke trail. At night, it glows enough to follow the impact point.
Base, not tip. They are generally not always) a few grains lighter than their solid counterparts; I probably should have added a /sarc tag – was poking a bit of fun at the calculations.
Gas/fuel mixture can’t be two rich nor two lean for ignition. If the vapor is just right you have ignition. The air we breathe consists of 21% oxygen which is non flammable but supports combustion so the vapors have to thin out before ignition. Ignition temp of gasoline is around -32deg. F. I did not research this. This is from memory when I was an instructor in basic fire fighting before one had to be certified by the County/State. on the job Experience was my method of teaching as a Volunteer FF.
Even gasoline is a lot harder to ignite than most people realize (a cigarette usually won’t do it). That’s the influence of Hollywood again.
I read somewhere that they found 50 lbs of Tannerite in his vehicle. Maybe he planned to blow up the tanks that way…or at least burst one.
My guess, if this is true, is that he found it wasn’t so easy to access the fuel depot; and the potshots were just something he did hoping for some movie type explosion.
The problem with a free society is that not everyone gets to die from old age peacefully in their sleep.
Jefferson knew this, he was a fan of a “dangerous freedom” which he said was far preferable to the “quiet of servitude”…
As most of who serve find out quickly, regardless of our physical strength and endurance life is extremely fragile and capricious at times. In an instant you can go from being here to being dead…a lot of us go out that way, in an instant. Whether it’s riding a motorcycle or being a victim.
Outlawing bump stocks won’t change that. Confiscating every single firearm in the USA (an impossible task mind you) won’t change that.
The best we can do is be prepared and accept that life has an inherent risk factor.
I’m not unsympathetic to victims of crime, any more than I am unsympathetic to those who die from cancer, heart disease, or any of a host of common reasons. But I can find nothing in our constitution that proclaims just because some people will suffer terrible outcomes and die a terrible death that any of the rest of us must surrender our natural born rights to the government. In fact I find quite the opposite.
The problem is too many people sat quietly by while the government fucked them out their fourth amendment protections under the Patriot Act where secret courts do their dirty work out of the view of the people…like some fucking communist nation. Consequently we’ve given the government the impression that they can just restrict the protections afforded by the amendments under the guise of safety because most people are too fucking stupid to pay attention beyond a few hours.
No doubt the statists will be happy to explain why it’s okay to infringe on the amendments, especially when it suits their government masters…but the rest of us will say no thanks and fuck you very much.
+1
I’m stealing this…because more people need to read it.
+100 VOV!
♥ I love you. ♥
Ban high capacity lungs so these blowhard anti-Freedom duchebags don’t bore me to death.
If you make guns illegal only criminals will have guns and by god I will be one.
Do you hear me Sen.s Blumenthal and Murphy?
You people belong to some kind of death cult.
Really, Joey? More and more evidence is surfacing that this asshole shared your views. Just like all but one mass-shooter in recent memory.
Gun-owning conservatives haven’t been doing this. It’s been liberals. Who’s the death cult again?
How would you know, Joey? You’re brain dead already.
You want to live in a distatorship. Yeah, you do. So move to Venezuela, sport. It’s exactly your cup of tea.
Only “death to those who would do me and mine harm”, joe-bloe.
The correlation of increased gun ownership to decreased crime is indisputable.
Here is the latest YTDs for you idiot’s model of gun control, Chicago:
Year to Date
Shot & Killed: 501
Shot & Wounded: 2412
Total Shot: 2913
Total Homicides: 538
Week in Progress (10/1 – 10/7)
Shot & Killed: 7
Shot & Wounded: 36
Total Shot: 43
Total Homicides: 7
I don’t think that those whose policies encourage this type of bloodshed, and who support the murder of unborn children, have any moral standing to preach to us about “death cults”. Hypocrite.
I haven’t said it a while so I will now. Fuck off Joe.
No asshole, it’s losers like you calling for all Trump supporters to die (ooh, and worshiping abortion as well… talk about a death cult… now why don’t you go back to blowing Boulder hippies, and let the adults talk..
Enjoy your time in the gulags, Joey. It’s cold and you’ll be hungry for a long, long time.
And here is his nine word shit and run. One thing you have to hand him; he is not verbose.
You need to suck start a howitzer.
(Grin)
Come take!
….
…..
………..
Coward.
Point of order.
The original patent by Percy Maxim Feb.21,1921 #446.822.
Was for “Silencers for guns”.
Just sayen.
The term “muffler” was also used. Both have fallen out of favor as proper terminology.
Silencerco is one of the largest suppressor manufacturers, the original .45 plans described the box magazine as a ‘clip’, ladies’ legs used to be referred to only as ‘limbs’ and bicycls used to be referred to as ‘velocipedes’. Times and common usages change.
“ladies’ legs used to be referred to only as ‘limbs”
Yeah but they still go all the way to the ground.
And some just go on up and make a perfect ass of themselves
I’m happy to compromise midway.
Ran across this call to have more men armed:
http://thefederalist.com/2017/10/05/need-men-guns-not-less/
The photo heading it up is good, too.
Warning: joe-bloe,
oddieOzzie, et al risk cranial explosions if they read this article. Proceed at your own risk.“…a bizarre antiquated manhood…” – Matthew Dowd
No. Manhood is not antiquated, nor is it bizarre. Dowd may find himself lacking in his nether regions, which is his problem, not mine. But to promote such a notion, that masculinity or manhood is socially unacceptable indicates that Dowd thinks we’re all supposed to be the submissive slugs that he is.
You caught that as well.
I still want a t-shirt that reads “My masculinity is only toxic to parasites.” Or some such.
One of the problems with some members of the media is not just that they’re ignorant of weapons, but also that they’re proud of such ignorance. An off-hand example is during the Gulf War in ’91, CNN had a live feed reporting to anchor Anderson Cooper in Atlanta from the al-Rashid Hotel in Baghdad. The reporters there told Cooper they were witnessing both anti-aircraft fire and tanks in the streets.
Cooper said, “Tanks? You mean those things that shoot bullets?”
Another example is a couple of years ago, a Business Insider reporter, it might have Steve Kovach, was corrected in the comments about the details of a story involving guns or gun violence.
“I would never touch a gun,” Kovach said, and meant it literally.
Such meepy aversion to firearms hasn’t always been the case. The novelist John Sandford, a pen name for Pulitzer-winning reporter John Camp, is obviously well-versed on the topic of guns without making a big deal of it. Another, strangely, was the late Hunter Thompson, Dr. Gonzo himself, who once wrote that he sometimes liked to shoot his .44 Magnum at night “just to watch the fireball.”
“I would never touch a gun,” Kovach said… I guess then if a perp assaults him and he saw a weapon within his grasp, he would say, “Go ahead and kill me then. I will never touch a gun.” Followed by, “ARIGHT!” BAM…BAM BAM.
Good post Perry.
If Gun Control Laws worked like libtards say, then places like Chicago, LA, NJ and Mexico would be crime-free utopias!
The Republicans are practically tripping over themselves in the race to a bipartisan ban on bump stocks
What happens to my 2 bumpstocks and my similar trigger devices from Bare Arms when bump stocks are banned?
Do I become criminal if I remain in possession?
Will I be compensated for the loss of my legally acquired property?
Probably not. They will simply ban the further manufacture and sale of them. Gov’t would have an impossible time trying to locate them all even if they tried to confiscate them. They could make it a crime to attach on to a semi-auto rifle. We have that with magazines with more than 10 round capacity in several states. Put a 20 or 30 rounder in the mag-well of a semi-auto rifle in those states and you are a criminal.
Love it when the say “we need to have a conversation about guns” because what they mean is “you shut up, sit there and let me lecture you”
The whole ban guns thing makes me think about how they passed a law making Sudafed an item you have to show ID, sign a book, and can only buy one box at a time. Because the druggies were manufacturing Methamphetamine out of it. So federal law, restrict the supply, no more Meth, right?
My friends that work narcotics haven’t noted any drop off in supply of meth on the streets, and indeed it’s even cheaper now.
But banning stuff stops it right?
Tucker Carlson eats a gun-grabber’s lunch, and then steals his girl. Figuratively speaking, of course.
To me, that BS about “I’m from a small town, I have a shotgun so I understand gun issues” sounds like those liberals who proclaim “I have a Black friend, so I understand racial issues.”
I have a muzzle loader. Do I get to claim that I understand the Napoleonic Wars?
I have a wife and don’t understand women.
Exactly.
Yeah, makes sense to me, too.
I have a set of kitchen knives, so I know absolutely everything about being a professional chef.
I thought (kindly) of you Ex when I read this:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2017/10/04/maleia-cole-murder-charges/
You’re so sweet, 26Limabeans!
“And bump-stocks aren’t all that easy to fire accurately. Paddock probably killed a lot fewer people because he couldn’t aim well enough with his stupid bump stock. Think about it – how do you maintain a stable firing stance when the rifle jumps back-and-forth against your shoulder”?
He was able to fire a lot more rounds and a lot easier since he didn’t have to try and repeatedly pull the trigger. You do realize your finger can get a lot more tired without a bump stock right? He had a pistol grip on the front of the rifle to help increase accuracy. The bump stock made it easier, not harder, to kill more people. If a bump stock is so inaccurate as you claim then I guess it should just be illegal since there’s no good reason for one to be used, especially in self defense. I wouldn’t want a load of inaccurate bullets flying all over the place and taking out things across the street in someone’s neighborhood. You think someone could easily just use their belt or some other cleaver way to recreate a bump stock? Well they could also just modify a rifle to make it full auto too. The point is that we at least tried to make keep them semi auto. Oh now I must be a big “liberal” for not thinking like you. Come on an call me a “liberal demon” because I don’t think bump stocks should be legal. Or how about some condescending “You don’t understand” remark. It’s ironic that gun lovers keep pushing harder and harder for things that make it easier and easier for liberals to make more and more laws against guns.
Also, arguing that you could have killed more people without a bump stock with a semi auto only means that you just gave liberals a better argument as why to ban high capacity magazines, AR 15s and AK rifles.
Are you arguing with yourself?
and losing, too
Your comment just proves you both got nothing. Nothing!
You haven’t offered anything worth responding to.
You going to tell us Jews are bad next along with some conspiracy?
Unless your goal is to set a record for shifting your argument as many times as possible in a single thread, you’ve got nothing.
OY VEY lily, gey strashe di gens!
Lily, you seem very confused on the subject, and I have no idea if you’re a liberal or not, but in this case, you’re certainly using their kind of “logic”.. As VOV posted earlier this day, any restriction on our Constitutional rights infringes on, and diminishes all of them. By the logic you’re using, no car should be allowed that can exceed the speed limit… after all, why would anyone do so?.. sounds pretty stupid when applied to a vehicle doesn’t it? and to make it even better, you have no Constitutional right to a vehicle…
You think not allowing people to own fully automatic rifles is a restriction on your constitutional rights?
Yes
We’re about to find out if your beliefs will be allowed.
They rarely are, until I am needed.
Yes. Very much so
lily,
First – the Constitution explicitly recognizes our rights as God-given, and protects those rights from man-made restrictions. They are not created by the Constitution, and hence the term “Constitutional rights” is misleading, although often used.
Second – we all currently have the right to own a fully-automatic firearm. Many private citizens do, and do so legally.
Any restriction on owning a firearm is an infringement upon our God-given right, and I could argue, obligation to protect ourselves, others, and the helpless from harm.
Any attempt to deny any God-given right to anyone without just cause (that is, without there being a condition such as a violent criminal record, a psychosis, or similar valid reason for the denial of the exercise of the right) is, in its essence, a denial of the humanity of the person whose right is being infringed.
We can plainly see in the comments of the liberals such as Nancy Sinatra that they consider conservatives as sub-human, unworthy of even remaining alive.
We all – you included – need the freedom to own a firearm, including a fully-automatic firearm if desired, in order to ensure that those who would demonize, dehumanize, and destroy us cannot easily do so.
Ok, I will.
You’re a liberal demon.
You dislike Jews?
“dislike Jews”?????????????
Where the Hell do you come up with that? He said ‘liberal demon’. The word ‘Jew’ only appears in YOUR response, Lily. Where does that come from, besides you?
Don’t you know the Jewish hater/conspiracy types like to hoover these types of places? They aren’t alway straight forward with their beliefs, do I asked.
Lily, this blog and it’s commenters are pretty overwhelmingly pro-Israel, and antisemitism gets stomped on pretty hard by Jonn and the rest of us. Sorry, but you’re swinging at nothing with that one, and kinda making yourself look stupid.
Yeah I doubt you know every single poster’s beliefs.
Well, let’s see. I’ve been reading and commenting here for four years now, and gotten a pretty good idea of where the regulars stand on things like this. How long have you been reading TAH? How many discussions have you participated in on this site? Can you cite any examples of antisemitism? You just pulled that one out of your ass because somebody disagreed with you. Does that make you an idiot or a troll?
“Both” for $500, Alex
That’s good you got them all profiled. For some reason when I go to Breitbart and look at youtube videos about the Las Vegas shooting the gun loving Jew haters are on there. Naturally I would expect them to visit this site too. Why wouldn’t they? This is sort of an alt right site?
You’re the smartest kid on the short bus, ain’t you?
If there is a “Jew hater” here they know it’s best to keep their mouth shut.
This group you see here is one of the most analytical, articulate, truly tolerant, god fearing, freedom loving Americans you’ll find.
Hell, they’ve tolerated me and my socially liberal ass for 5 years now!
Nice to see your mind was made up before you got here and no amount of evidence to the contrary will convince you that your assumption might not be correct. There’s quite a few gun-loving Jews out there, too, ya know. Have you not heard of Ben Shapiro, or noticed that he’s pretty popular amongst TAHers?
I’m also getting a kick out of that “alt-right” crap. What is that, anyway? It’s hard to decipher, seeing as how the modern left throws it at anyone who favors the Constitution, personal responsibility, national securit, right to life, right to self defense, or anything that doesn’t fall in line with totalitarian socialism—which is ironic, as they seem to regard the term as something akin to “nazi.”
Again, you keep making the accusation without citing a single example to support it, implicitly demanding that we bear the burden of proof otherwise. We refuse to play your game. Go look for yourself. Try a few keywords in the TAH search box, see what pops up. If your accusations persist after that, you will confirm the suspicion that you’re an idiot.
Yeah, okay, you’re insulting people and picking a fight for no reason, so what’s your REAL agenda? Huh?
You said you’re a combat veteran? That’s it? Nothing follows? Most people here have some way of communicating what and where they were. Branch codes are easy to figure out, so what’s yours?
C’mon – SPILL!
I already said I was in the 101st airborne, 327th infantry regiment. Here’s lets see if you can find me in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45HtnlaQJkE
Maybe you can bust me for stolen valor because I claimed to have shaved that day when I didn’t.
You’re just chock full of liberal looney-tunes ASS-umptions, thus I wonder if you aren’t a UC Berzerkely stoodint? We used to have one come here and parade his idiocy as well as his total lack of logic and common sense for all of us to see.
Oh yes, I’ a big liberal because I don’t think we should simulate fully automatic weapons with bump stocks. Of course I’m OK with you owning an AR15 and AK74 with high capacity magazine, but nooooooo I’m a liberal because we had a disagreement on one point. Rational people must be laughing at you all right now if they read this,lol.
lily – your doubt is irrelevant to reality.
TOW, like myself and many others here, have been around along enough to have identified any anti-Semitism among group participants.
What you are doing is throwing out a straw-man argument to distract from the fact that your postings have no logical foundations at all.
Go learn how to reason and discuss with real adults, then come back, OK?
Last I looked I’m a real adult, a combat veteran. So why don’t you treat me with some respect? You know you’re stupid, very stupid and childish. Keep projecting your insecurity onto me.
A combat veteran? And you’re being as rude as you can toward total strangers? You want respect, you’d better start giving it.
Combat veteran? Really?
Many of those who post comments are also combat veterans, and they don’t act like snotty little brats with a bone to pick over nothing, but YOU do.
Oh yes, I didn’t give respect because I said I don’t like bump stocks. You are funny.
Lay of the crack and go pay your child support. Then get back to me.
Better yet, YOU lay off on throwing hissy-fits all over this thread and come back when you feel like you can act like an adult, lily!
A hissy fit because I don’t like bump stocks? That’s funny, maybe you should look in the mirror. You need to act like an adult who can have a disagreement without being the first to ad hominem attack.
It appears to me, LILY, that your only reason for posting comments is to start a fight over nothing. Your commenta AND you don’t make any sense.
I don’t know where your attitude comes from, but you are so far off base in what you’re posting that you may not find your way back.
And throwing out buzz-words like alt-right? You are SO wrong, SO off the wall with that remark! You want respect? Then try giving it instead of picking a fight over nothing.
All anyone has to do is look back through what you’ve posted to find what direction you’re taking.
My comments on bump stock wern’t addressed by most of you. Mostly the comments I see here are conservatives who are thoughtless using ad hominem. It’s funny in a way because when I check various websites and turn on conservative talk radio to hear what’s said they seem to be reading off a talking point list in response to bump stocks. The belt buckle argument is the most ridiculous one. It’s so simple to understand that the entire idea of banning fully auto and the three round burst capacity on the AR15 was simply to make the shoot have to pull the trigger for each and every shot. The bump stock makes it to where the shooter doesn’t have to pull the trigger for each and every shot. What’s so hard about that for you to all understand? That’s why the bump stock should be illegal. See you don’t want to understand it. You just want to spout the same talking points I hear from conservatives going hysterical in response to the ongoing gun debate. You just go along with the group.
OY VEY, are you now accusing TAH of being a haven of Anti-Semites? Gey strashen die gens instead of coming here to try to hok our choniks!
It was a question, not an accusation. Just read on Breitbart or look at some video on the Las Vegas shooting and I’m sure you will see someone with a nice little NAZI avatar railing against anyone who dares to want to ban bump stocks.
Some friendly advice: LAY OFF the Village Voice Kool-Aid and take a look at everyday reality, and by that I mean life totally outside NYC, LA and San Foo-foo.
You mean that inbred flyover country? It’s amazing how the left forces a mandate of tolerance and they go schizo if you have an opinion that is to the contrary.
Reeducation camps are acomin’ if this guy gets his way
I wonder if lily isn’t a protege of a certain UC Berzerkely critter that used to come here and defecate in his diaper when nobody saw things his way?
lily – I had to go look up “bump stocks” when that term was first used in this story.
I think one commentator put it this way (GB paraphrased version) bump stocks are a good way to turn money into a lot of noise.
They are inaccurate unless one is going for the “spray and pray” method of assault/defense. For this situation, the initial inaccuracy was probably irrelevant to the shooter due to the large number of targets in a small space. He didn’t care if the shot the guy in the red ball cap if he managed to get the folks around him. The additional factor in the shooters head that may have made a bump stock attractive to him is the simulation of automatic fire would create panic in the people at whom he was firing.
Working on the theory that he was psychotic, both of these factors would be attractive to him. He just wanted to shoot a lot of people and terrorize those he did not kill.
Personally, I do not find it attractive to burn lots of ammo at a time. I prefer to try to get all my rounds in the X ring, rather than just dump a bunch down range.
Others however (including my much-younger self) enjoy just sending a lot of rounds down range and probably getting them on the paper. They may find bump stocks or other binary trigger devices quite attractive.
I drive my car at posted speeds, and glory in getting the most miles possible out of a vehicle. Others modify their cars to get around a NASCAR track as fast as possible. Same distinction.
Just because you or I do not enjoy bump stocks does not mean we have the right to keep others from enjoying them. And it keeps the ammo manufacturers busy, so its good for the economy. (Do I need the /jk tag on that?)
You think people should be able to own fully automatic rifles because burning ammo is good for the economy? Also, the belt loop argument that’s being pushed is stupid. The bump stock has a design to perfectly slip back and fourth, a belt loop doesn’t work the same way and isn’t as reliable.
So, yes, I do think we should be allowed to own automatics. The Revolution was fought on private field artillery and equipment used for the greater good of the nation.
Being blunt? We’re lucky he wasn’t using things that go boom.
But that’s not the point of this screed is it? You’re going to be cherry picking this for somewhere else. You’re not here to have a discussion, you’re here to copy/paste a few canned answers push for a response. You want more serious answers, talk like an adult.
Oy Vey, kindling, you don’t understand the “/jk” tag?
Here I thought we were having an adult conversation. Child, does your Mommy know you are on the computer?
Does your mommy know you’re on the computer stupid kid?
What are you, a UC Berzerkely stoodint?
So your basis for banning something is that “there’s no good reason for one”?
I don’t believe fully automatic rifles should be owned by the civilians. Neither did Ronald Reagan. Bush 43 allowed it to happen and now we’ve had some pretty bad mass shootings.
You are entitled to your beliefs but believing in the boogie-man doesn’t make him real and Bush didn’t “allow” automatic rifles to happen.
Wait, what?
Cite it.
No. He didn’t. Go google it, we’ll wait.
Bush 43 allowed what to happen? The ownership of fully automatic rifles? You obviously don’t know what you are talking about. Moreover, there have been exactly 3 crimes committed with Class III licensed full-auto weapons since 1935. Like most proggies you don’t know what you are talking about. But then that never seems to deter them.
Reagan’s ban on these rifles was allowed to expire. Did you forget?
Wrong! Reagan didn’t ban semi-auto rifles you dimwits call “assault rifles.” Congress did and Clinton signed it into law. The law had a sunset clause which took effect. The so called ban didn’t effectively ban them anyway. But morons like you wouldn’t know that. All you progs know how to do is emote about the false facts in the parallel universe you inhabit.
History shows that Reagan’s track record on guns is a winding road. He was a strong gun rights supporter who signed legislation easing an earlier gun law. But he also supported legislation for background checks and a waiting period for potential gun owners. He did support an assault-weapons ban and even joined two other former presidents in a letter to a major newspaper urging congressional approval of a ban.
so…you got proven wrong and instead of just admitting you confused Reagan with Clinton–I know so easy to do–you double down with an unsupported assertion that Reagan supported “assault weapons ban”.
Unsupported assertions are OK unless they are just a strawman used after the original fallacy fails.
Such is the case here.
Y’all are conflating Reagan facts: 1) He did sign a letter supporting the Clinton ban with Carter and Ford 2) He was on record opposing allowing civilians to own MILITARY weapons 3) He outlawed sale of NEW automatic weapons in 1986. Old weapons were allowed, so it was not a total ban (and this explains the sky-high prices today, the available pool is limited.) Now for all you libbies like Lily … you bitch that he had Alzheimers and was not responsible during his second term and on… ALL of the above took place after his second term began. Can’t have it both ways…
Yes, but your argument fails by your forgetting that many mass shootings/murders have happened without the use of fully automatic weapons. For example, Adam Lanza did not use any fully automatic weapon when he shot children and teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School. The weapons he used included three semi-automatic firearms found with Lanza: a .223-caliber Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, a 10mm Glock 20SF handgun, and a 9mm SIG Sauer P226 handgun. Outside the school, an Izhmash Saiga-12 shotgun was found in the car Lanza had driven. And then there are all those postal shootings: August 19, 1983, Johnston, South Carolina: Perry Smith, a resigned USPS employee, charged into the Johnston post office with a 12-gauge shotgun and began firing at workers in a hall, killing the postmaster and wounding two other employees.[4] December 2, 1983, Anniston, Alabama: James Brooks, 53, entered into the Anniston, Alabama, post office with a .38 caliber pistol killing the postmaster, and injuring his immediate supervisor. Subsequent to killing the postmaster, James Brooks ran up the stairs of the building pursuing his supervisor and shooting him twice.[5] March 6, 1985, Atlanta, Georgia: Steven Brownlee, with 12 years of service, opened fire on the night shift in the Atlanta, Georgia, main post office with a .22 caliber pistol and killed a supervisor and a coworker, including wounding a third coworker in a mail sorting area.[5] November 15, 1985, Manitou, Oklahoma: Forrest Albert (F.A) Reffner, 39, entered the Manitou Post Office to check his elderly mother’s mail when 74-year-old Arvell “Pete” Conner entered the post office armed with a .38 caliber, arguing with Reffner before shooting and killing him inside the main post office. August 20, 1986, Edmond, Oklahoma: Patrick Sherrill, a part-time letter carrier, entered the Edmond Postal Office and fatally shot 14 employees and wounded six. He subsequently committed suicide. December 14, 1988, New Orleans, Louisiana: Warren Murphy, entered into the New Orleans, Louisiana, postal facility with a 12-gauge shotgun hidden under his clothing. Later during his work shift, after an incident with a supervisor, he reportedly went to the men’s room and came out brandishing… Read more »
Let’s just make it easier with bump stocks. Why not legalize tow missiles since people can make bombs and fly them in on drones?
Your hyperbole doesn’t help your case any more than your baseless accusations of antisemitism.
Give it up, Lily. You lost the argument.
I’m right. You’re wrong.
I can provide links to everything I posted.
You’re pissing into the wind trying to start a fight over nothing, using provocative words and phrases. You’re not very good at it.
Shifting position because you’re losing doesn’t mean you won, either. It means you lost big time. You have no argument and you’ve provided no backup for your claims.
You’re just not very good at this.
This isn’t a black and white argument. We both could be somewhat right and somewhat wrong on bump stocks. The way I see it bump stocks are simulating automatic weapons and make gun control more of an issue, needlessly.
I can turn any semi-automatic weapon into a fully-automatic weapon with a heavy-duty rubber band. No bump stock is required.
You not only lost your argument, you have none.
At one time in England before the shit hit the fan, the Police did not carry fire arms. I heard it was a mutual agreement between the PD and criminal element but that is hearsay. I started working for Brink’s in 1970 and when I picked the night shift for six months, picking up securities in the NYC financial district, we used couriers to ride commercial aircraft to cities all over the globe. The Brink’s crews in London did not carry fire arms but had guard dogs on the trucks instead. It worked for a number of years until things got bad. It came to a head when a delivery was being made and a robber came up to the guard outside the truck, killed the dog with a shot gun blast and took the valuables. One of the couriers told us that the dogs were a pain in the butt sometimes because they sometimes used to take a dump inside the truck. After the robbery, the company took the dogs off of the trucks. Gun show up at the Palm Beach County Fairground next week Oct. 14-15. I’ll see if I can buy 500 surplus live RPG’s and an MG 42 along with a 16 inch gun mounted on a railroad flat car along with 100 16 in. shells/powder bags. Point of interest. My Dad was Coast Arty during WW 2 and when he was stationed at Fort Tilden in Rockaway Queens, NYC, they used to take the out dated 16in. powder bags out to the parking lot and dump the contents in various designs and burn it off watching the flame following the design they just made. He was also at Fort Hancock in Brooklyn NYC and Earl weapons Station in New Jersey.
Our mortar men did that also with the unused power charges after a long shoot. They tried to spell their names or some such thing then burn the excess powder.
I’m still looking for those machine guns and missile launchers the hysterical and hyperbole-addicted hippies keep screaming about. I go to gun shows, gun shops, CalGuns, and everywhere else I can think of, but nobody seems to have such cool toys in stock…
They are only visible with the aid of certain substances used by the observers.
IF your gun show is selling rail mounted 16 inch guns I need to head up your way. lol
Fuck that douchebag.
That asshole ever pay his late tax bills or explain that condo in the Bahamas?
Of course not. You think 0bama’s IRS would ever go after a black Dhimmicrat politician?
You know what I’d like? I’d like politicians and those on the left to stop the mealy mouthed “start a conversation” or “begin the discussion” and just come out and say “we want to ban all guns”. Then maybe we have a point to start at.
If your dishonest right of the bat then I’m not engaging in anything with you unless your a semi hot chick who tells me she is a virgin or loves me long time
Steven Crowder has several videos on his site showing the repeated lies by the progtard Dhimmicrat pols about guns, like the one where 0bama says people from Illinois buy guns in Indiana and take them to Chiraq/Shotcago and that is the primary cause of the gun crime there. Crowder then goes to numerous gun shops and gun shows in Indiana and tries to buy guns without a background check or as an Illinois resident. He fails every time, as the dealers tell him no; it is illegal and a felony.
That ‘straw purchase in Indiana’ crap has died away since the news that the Tribune published about 111 guns being stolen out of a parked freight car on Chicago’s south side int he railyards down there. To date, 19 of those stolen Rugers have shown up connected to crimes in Chicago. The remainder have not yet been found.
And more are being stolen out of those parked freight cars even now. The whole ‘straw purchase’ story was baloney and has since been dropped. And oddly, that Flegler person has shut his yap, too.
And how many guns used in violent crimes have cycled through multiple CPD buybacks? I seem to remember hearing something about that.
Average age of guns traced in crimes 9 years per BATFE.
That ‘gunshow loophole’…As an active duty Infantryman stationed at Benning I got a 72 hour hold on a purchase at a gun show in Columbus GA. The deadly ‘assault weapon’ in question, a 1943 Mosin Nagant.
Please someone, anyone tell me the laws don’t work. FFS.
Since I don’t have an invisible friend, would some of you please thank yours that in the midst of all this we do not have whats her name in the White House.
Dave you need to give warnings. I almost inhaled part of a shot of single malt when I scrolled down to that scary photo. It isn’t even close to Halloween.
Dave, if that doesn’t convince you that God is looking out for us, nothing will.
Every day I thank GOD that damn thing didn’t get elected President!!!
Geezo Pete, Dave Hardin. Could PLEASE post a zpew alert when you do that?
I had hot tea right under my nose. Thank the Elves and Brownies I didn’t inhale.
Glad I wasn’t eating when I saw this.
Hate to waste good food upchucking.
Excuse me while I go get the eye bleach.
Greetings my friends in U.S.A, People around the world are under the illusion that there are no semi-auto military style guns in circulation in Australia like the once very common SKS & SKK or L1A1 (FN-FAL) which is completely false & wrong.
In 1996 then P.M John Howard banned the sale & ownership of such rifles and others and grabbed the ones they could back but as only the gun owner was licenced in many states & individual firearms were not a lot of those semi-autos got stashed and went underground & in time onto the grey & black market, some estimates are 600,000. Australian gun laws while strict in many ways & ‘hostile & harsh’ towards law abiding gun owners they still work for a law abiding shooter, you quickly learn to make your first shot an accurate one rather than spray & pray. But if you want a semi-auto and are prepared to pay & had the contacts you could buy anything including of those 9 stolen Australian army anti-tank rockets still somewhere or any other countless black market semi auto pistols and rifles and some bloke recently got caught while trying to sell an un-licenced 1928 Thompson machine gun with drum mags and ammo all in pristine original condition for $20K AUD. A recent 3 month long gun amnesty here saw 26,000 guns of all types handed in.
CORRECTION>>>> Australia’s P.M Malcolm Turdball has stated just now on Australian A.B.C Radio that law abiding Aussies have handed in 51,000 illegal firearms during the recent three month gun amnesty….problem solved.
That’s about $10K US less than that Thompson would go for here. Maybe I need to book a trip Down Under.
Yep, The crim was down at the local shopping mall in Marrickville N.S.W with it in a bag waiting on a sale when nabbed, there is a news article from the Sydney Morning Herald online with photo’s. A WW1 artillery Luger & 1870 Sharpe’s trapdoor were among the early hand-ins of the 51,000 un-registered guns turned in for destruction during the country wide gun amnesty, makes you wonder what’s left given a rusted Spandau 08 WW1 machine gun was found dumped in a creek not far from here.
But one things for sure, you can bet not one outlaw motorcycle club member or street level criminal or organised crime types participated.
Yep, when was the last time ANYONE saw criminals lining up to turn their guns in as soon as a new law was passed?
When it’s no questions asked, and the firearm was previously used in a crime API… great way to dump evidence..
On the other hand, I still have an old Lorcin that won’t fire and a Phoenix .22LR pistol with a cracked slide if they ever have a gun buyback in my neck of the woods…
https://www.impactguns.com/machine-guns.aspx
Thompsons aren’t that expensive if you look around. About 9K right there.
If ya have the permit, desire and the ammo to expend. Rock and Roll!
I would happily trade my left nut and/or kidney for a legit Thompson, but my wife won’t let me. Imagine packing that for open carry!
sorry…that one was a .22
Here’s a .45 with a buy it now price of $4899
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/705209105
Just convince you wife how much sexier she’d be on the range with that. 🙂
$5k to $7k for a gun that mostly makes a lot of noise and drills holes in stuff.
I’d rather have a new fridge, stove, dishwasher and an extra 7.0CF freezer, and I’d still have money left over.
and that kids, is what we call… freedom
Well, you see, with the leftover money, I could buy a nice little pink camo .38 pistol and some ammo (for target practice, of course), pay the range fees, and still take people out to dinner.
I didn’t think of you as the pink camo type, Ex.
I’m OK with “sensible gun control” as long as the first item on the agenda is outlawing pink camo. And purple handguns.
Does anyone really need a pink camo rifle? Or mint green, for that matter.
Yes. I do. I need pink camo. If there is anything more ridiculous than that, I need to know now. Mint green, not so much.
Would your desire to covet pink camo be altered a bit with the knowledge that whenever some of us see it we experience immediate revulsion recalling code pink unalterably and forever linking themselves to pink camo? It’s just too yucky to contemplate now.
Lefties should NEVER be allowed near the stuff. Ever.
I hadn’t thought of Code Pink in over a year. Now I’m revolted, too.
Okay, I’ll go for Realtree or something.