Myth #3 - Guns are bad

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

. can somebody explain to me in plain english why the fuck anyone would even want such a weapon?

Hobby? Appreciation of the craftsmanship? Target practice? Because it looks pretty? Because it holds sentimental value for one reason or another?

I could go on, I think.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[PhillyKev 0]

Because they are very well made, extremely accurate, ergonomic, and easily customizable to suit your preferences. Plus they're black and look scary.

[bmcd308 0]

Who said anything about using it for hunting? The Second Amendment is not about ducks.

----------------------------------
www.jumpelvis.com

[kallend 2,117]

Quote

Quote

consider that for most other devices that have the potential for the instant lethality that guns do, we regulate them fairly heavily

Name another consumer product where the manufacturer must get the permission of the federal government before it can begin making the product; where this manufacturer must be licensed by the federal government; where every single item produced must be accounted for, at every step of manufacture, storage, shipping, distribution, and sale; where every single store selling the product must seek permission from the federal government to sell the product; where every single store wanting to sell the product must be licensed to sell the product; where every single store wanting to sell the product must keep written records of every single item sold, under penalty of a felony conviction; where every purchase of this consumer product must be approved by the Federal Bureau of Investigation; where theft of this consumer product from the store constitutes a federal felony; where the sale of the product is strictly limited by age and background of the purchaser; and where all product liability and negligence laws apply just as they do for any other product.

Well, with some minor changes (FBI --> FAA) it could describe airplanes, pilots, airplane maintenance etc.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[PhillyKev 0]

I was kind of thinking of prescription drugs, too.

[quade 4]

Quote

Who said anything about using it for hunting? The Second Amendment is not about ducks.

So, you're going to use it in self defense or as part of a state militia? 'Cause, I'm thinking for self defense a rifle like this doesn't make too much sense. State militia, well, that's another story altogether, but I don't think you really wanna go down that road -- do you? I mean, seriously why would a person want this weapon?

I'm not trying to be an asshole here, I really want to know. Do any of you actually own (or maybe owned and had it confiscated) this weapon and why did you purchase it?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[winsor 236]

Quote

Quote

http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/contracosta/FaxAlerts/sksalert.shtml

Fuckin' A, that's esoteric shit.

Ok, I'm not that much of a gun wonk . . . can somebody explain to me in plain english why the fuck anyone would even want such a weapon?

I mean, I can certainly understand it from a criminal's perspective -- easily modified to accept high capacity magazines (and I'm pretty sure that's why they were banned -- no fuckin' duh!), but if you're using this thing for hunting . . . WTF?

I can explain it in plain English, but "if you have to ask, you wouldn't understand," as the saying goes.

Again, a little education is all that is required to alleviate all kinds of ignorance.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

Name another consumer product where the manufacturer must...

Well, with some minor changes (FBI --> FAA) it could describe airplanes, pilots, airplane maintenance etc.

Quite a few of those things do not apply for airplanes and aircraft manufacturers. Your attempt at an analogy fails.

[Douva 0]

Quote

Quote

http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/contracosta/FaxAlerts/sksalert.shtml

Fuckin' A, that's esoteric shit.

Ok, I'm not that much of a gun wonk . . . can somebody explain to me in plain english why the fuck anyone would even want such a weapon?

I mean, I can certainly understand it from a criminal's perspective -- easily modified to accept high capacity magazines (and I'm pretty sure that's why they were banned -- no fuckin' duh!), but if you're using this thing for hunting . . . WTF?

Show me where the United States constitution says anything about hunting? The only mention of "arms" in the constitution is in relation to "security." That point aside, there are many items sold in this country that serve no purpose to some or a majority of the population, but that doesn't mean we outlaw them. "Assault weapons" are reliable and accurate (particularly outdoors) in defense situations and for many forms of hunting. So called "assault weapons" fire the same ammunition as many hunting rifles, "assault weapons" fire no more rapidly than most hunting rifles, and many hunting rifles also come with detachable magazines. "Assault weapons" and high capacity magazines are not a major national problem. According to the FBI, "assault weapons" were used in 1.4% of all gun crimes and 0.25% of all violent crimes prior to the first "assault weapons" bans. Criminals prefer easily concealable weapons (which "assault weapons" are not) and are more likely to use a single shot derringer than an "assault weapon." Just because an item's description seems scary to you is not a legitimate reason to ban its ownership for the rest of the nation--Arguments for or against banning an item should be based on facts, not emotion.

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I'm thinking for self defense a rifle like this doesn't make too much sense.

Do you think that the government should specify which firearms are permissable for self-defense, and imprison anyone who uses some other type of firearm in a successfull self-defense situation?

Locking up crime victims would be a great program!

Quote

I mean, seriously why would a person want this weapon?

I bought one simply because Bill Clinton banned the import of any more of them, and I wanted to have something that Clinton didn't want me to have.

Clinton also made me buy an AR-15 rifle, a so-called "assault weapon", as well as a so-called "high capacity" handgun, which has a magazine that holds more than 10 cartridges.

Billy was quite a gun salesman. I was kind of wishing he would ban .50 caliber rifles too, so that I'd have an excuse to buy one of those before implementation. I wouldn't have any of these nice firearms if it hadn't been for Billy.

I've only shot my SKS once. It's just a novelty to me. They are known to be quite reliable, but not very accurate beyond a couple hundred yards.

What exactly is it about an SKS that you are so worried about? They are no more dangerous to the public than any other type of rifle.

[quade 4]

Quote

I can explain it in plain English, but "if you have to ask, you wouldn't understand," as the saying goes.

Possibly the most understandable and honest thing you could say to me.

Some of the other arguments posted in this thread are, well, silly, to me at least. I especially like the one that suggest that spite for Bill Clinton was a good motive for purchasing the weapon.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Douva 0]

Quote

Quote

Who said anything about using it for hunting? The Second Amendment is not about ducks.

So, you're going to use it in self defense or as part of a state militia? 'Cause, I'm thinking for self defense a rifle like this doesn't make too much sense. State militia, well, that's another story altogether, but I don't think you really wanna go down that road -- do you? I mean, seriously why would a person want this weapon?

I'm not trying to be an asshole here, I really want to know. Do any of you actually own (or maybe owned and had it confiscated) this weapon and why did you purchase it?

First of all, the constitutional intention of "state militia" was an armed population prepared to defend the state at a moment's notice, and it's hard to maintain that when the population isn't allowed to be armed (side note: This militia was intended to remain completely autonomous of the federal government). But we can let that slide for now. These guns are useful for self defense in civil defense situations. They were used by shop owners to defend their stores during the '92 Los Angeles riots. To answer your second question, I own an SKS, but it is not modified to the "sporter" configuration because I want to be able to keep the bayonet (Yes, they regulate bayonets--Apparently bayonetings are also a national crisis) and grenade launcher attached (Before you throw an ignorant fit, a grenade launcher is a functionless, aesthetic piece of metal attached to the end of the barrel, incapable doing anything besides looking scary). Federal law says you have to remove the bayonet and grenade launcher before attaching a detachable magazine. The gun is a collector's item, so I prefer to keep these features intact so that it can be returned to its original Soviet configuration. What annoys me is how arbitrary some of these laws are (Bayonet restrictions on a rifle--are you kidding me?)

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[AggieDave 6]

Paul,


Have you ever shot a SKS or an AK-47? They're fun to shoot, that's the bottom line. Also, you can go to shooting competitions with them, which are also fun.

Why do you need a parachute? Are you going to hijack a plane, rob everyone on board and then jump out? You know, history shows that this can and will happen if you have a parachute. You wouldn't need it to go have fun on the weekends with it. Infact, you shouldn't be allowed to have it at all.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[quade 4]

Quote

bought one simply because Bill Clinton banned the import of any more of them, and I wanted to have something that Clinton didn't want me to have.

Uh, yeah . . . I guess that makes sense. Too bad you can't afford WMDs? I still don't really understand your line of reasoning.

Quote

What exactly is it about an SKS that you are so worried about? They are no more dangerous to the public than any other type of rifle.

Ever actually see the aftermath of an LA gang shoot up with AK-47s and other such weapons being used? I have, first person and with my own eyes. It ain't pretty.

I fully support the assault weapons ban and nothing you can say will disuade me from that position.

I'm open to dialog, thoughts and ideas on lots of things, but your attempts to negate all gun control laws based on a few specific instances of removing assault weapons is, to my mind -- just silly.

Certainly there can be some middle ground. A place where street sweeper weapons are out of general circulation and a place where a person can reasonably use weapons for their entertainment value as well as protect his family.

If you can't understand the concept of compromise, I guess there really is nothing further to talk about.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

I fully support the assault weapons ban and nothing you can say will disuade me from that position.

Why? Do you know what the AWB banned?

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[quade 4]

Quote

Why? Do you know what the AWB banned?

I have a basic grasp of it. I will admit I do not know each and ever wacky variation affected.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Ever actually see the aftermath of an LA gang shoot up with AK-47s and other such weapons being used? I have, first person and with my own eyes. It ain't pretty.

I'm glad that since the ban, that they have no longer been able to get assault rifles and haven't been able to do that anymore.

Oh, wait, they still do don't they? Glad to see another one of our rights taken away for the good of the "people".

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Jimbo 0]

You can read about it here. It bans scary looking guns.

Why do you support the ban?

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Douva 0]

Quote

Ever actually see the aftermath of an LA gang shoot up with AK-47s and other such weapons being used? I have, first person and with my own eyes. It ain't pretty.

I'd like to hear more details about this "shoot up" and where you saw the aftermath.

Quote

I fully support the assault weapons ban and nothing you can say will disuade me from that position.

I'd be willing to bet you can't even come close to telling me what the assault weapons ban bans without looking it up on the Internet (which previous posts have probably already inspired you to do).

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[quade 4]

Yeah, we're done.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Possibly the most understandable and honest thing you could say to me.

Some of the other arguments posted in this thread are, well, silly, to me at least. I especially like the one that suggest that spite for Bill Clinton was a good motive for purchasing the weapon.

Actually, the "in spite of Clinton" argument makes a good deal of sense when you look past the surface. These items are now guaranteed collectors items. We know exactly how many of them are out there, that no more will be made, and that some people place very high monetary values on them.

Pretty solid investment as far as I can see. It's also why corporations are generally easier to add to the BATF list of "allowed" purchasers for full auto firearms. Their reason is not "recreation" or anything like that. It is "investment."

(I can picture the wheels spinning in quade's mind as he reads this one )

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Ok, I'm not that much of a gun wonk . . . can somebody explain to me in plain english why the fuck anyone would even want such a weapon?

I mean, I can certainly understand it from a criminal's perspective -- easily modified to accept high capacity magazines (and I'm pretty sure that's why they were banned -- no fuckin' duh!), but if you're using this thing for hunting . . . WTF?

quade, Ive got news for you. just about any firearm with a detachable magazine can accept a "high capacity" magazine. That includes basically every semiautomatic handgun on earth. All you need to make something "high capacity" [I think of it as full capacity, but that's semantics] is make the magazine longer. Probably hundreds of thousands of pre-ban AK type magazines are out there. And making a new one, while illegal, is not all that hard. It's basically just three pieces of sheet metal and a spring.

To me, high capacity is a drum magazine [think bad gangster movies - Tommy Gun] or a box magazine [think think really big machine gun with belt fed ammo].

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

Quote

Rated sharpshooter on the 9mm (I forget the designation)

Wouldn't that be the Beretta "M9"?

Trivia: the Italian gun manufacturer Beretta, is the oldest continually operational business in the entire world.

Quote

Annualy go to the firing range to fire a 7.62 mm M1 Gurant

What's that? Do you mean the M1 Garand, the WWII service rifle?

Gen. Patton called the Garand "the greatest battlefield implement ever devised." When all the other armies of WWII were still using bolt-action rifles for their standard issue, only the Americans had a semi-auto - the M1 Garand.

yup the Beretta M9

and yup again. it is the garand. the damn thing has such a kick that i refuse to fire more than 10 rounds with the thing because i don't want to risk a dislocated shoulder.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

* Bonnie Elmasri-- She inquired about getting a gun to protect herself from a husband who had repeatedly threatened to kill her. She was told there was a 48 hour waiting period to buy a handgun. But unfortunately, Bonnie was never able to pick up a gun. She and her two sons were killed the next day by an abusive husband of whom the police were well aware.
- Congressional Record, 8 May 1991, pp. H 2859, H 2862.

I have a difficult time believing that purchasing a handgun was her only option for survival. Need to know the whole story.

Quote

* Marine Cpl. Rayna Ross -- she bought a gun (in a non-waiting period state) and used it to kill an attacker in self-defense two days later. Had a 5-day waiting period been in effect, Ms. Ross would have been defenseless against the man who was stalking her.
- Wall Street Journal, 3 March 1994 at A10.

This leads me to question where and when this occured. ie location and time of day. The funny thing is that the USMC prevents marines from keeping firearms in the barracks or on base housing. If personal firearms are to be kept on base then they must be registered and stored in the base armory. Wonder why that is?

Quote

* Los Angeles riots -- USA Today reported that many of the people rushing to gun stores during the 1992 riots were "lifelong gun-control advocates, running to buy an item they thought they'd never need." Ironically, they were outraged to discover they had to wait 15 days to buy a gun for self-defense.
- Jonathan T. Lovitt, "Survival for the armed," USA Today, 4 May 1992.

Now that IS ironic! Again I'd like to know more including the locations and what types of businesses they owned.

Its nice that you quoted these for me, however I am not satisfied with small excerpts when we all know there is a much larger story behind it. I am not trusting enough to take excerpts such as these at face value. Get these off the NRA website?

Keep in mind that I am remaining open minded and very interested in learning more. However I do feel that the NRA is just as extreme as those gun-control politicians you quoted.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

Quote

Yes I do in fact support... the 5 day waiting period because this IMO prevents anyone from purchasing a firearm during a fit of anger. Seriously...anyone who can't wait 5 whole days should have planned further ahead.

It seems to me that if that's the justification for waiting periods, then anyone who already owns a gun should be exempt from them. After all, if a person already owns a gun, no waiting period is going to stop him/her from shooting someone in the heat of the moment. There's no logical reason on the basis you present to prevent someone from purchasing a second or subsequent firearm with no waiting period whatsoever.

GOOD POINT! Ok I agree. Only a waiting period for first time gun buyers is necessary. It does seem that in a round about way you do agree that a waiting period will prevent a first time buyer from shooting someone in a fit of anger. Is that right?

www.FourWheelerHB.com