Yeah i think its funny that someone can't have an automatic ak but my semi-auto serbu is legal


my bullet is bigger than their entire round.....

11/10/2008 11:23:51 AM

JUST WATCH THIS, DOOFUSES!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR9RN_iSKtg

11/10/2008 11:24:14 AM

^that video truly says it all

11/10/2008 11:25:23 AM

Quote :

"but i can understand the magazine capacity (after all, how many shots do you need to carry with you to go to the movies?)"

AS MANY AS IT TAKES. I USUALLY CARRY WELL OVER 50 ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION WITH ME.

11/10/2008 11:26:20 AM

what about the 50 round magazines in use in my ruger 10-22?

i just don't like to have to reload after every 10 rounds when i'm plinking.

should they be able to ban those? because they used to be banned.

11/10/2008 11:27:04 AM

11/10/2008 11:27:25 AM

what's the point of a mag limit? I really see none

11/10/2008 11:27:29 AM

^i guess they think thugs can't carry extra magazines

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 11:28 AM. Reason : or they think this will slow them down a little bit]

11/10/2008 11:28:05 AM

^ yeah i had a 100rnd drum for mine.. hahhaa fun times..

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 11:28 AM. Reason : .]

11/10/2008 11:28:19 AM

lol, yeh, because they purchased the gun, illegally, to use it to commit crimes, and now they're going to follow a mag limit law!

11/10/2008 11:28:39 AM

I'MA GONNA GO GIT ME A NEW SCATTERGUN. MAW! WARM UP THE RAMBLER!

11/10/2008 11:29:13 AM

^^congratulations, you're in the gun control club!

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 11:29 AM. Reason : durrrr]

11/10/2008 11:29:15 AM

LOLz

gun control people really don't make sense to me.

I'm all for bg & mh checks, and thus a permit, but that's it

11/10/2008 11:30:53 AM

THAT'S THE OTHER THING, THERE USED TO BE A BAN ON MAGAZINES WITH MORE THAN 10 ROUND CAPACITY.

THAT BAN EXPIRED WHEN CLINTON LEFT.

HAVE YOU NOTICED A MAJOR ISSUE WITH THESE MAGAZINES NOW BEING LEGAL? IF THERE ARE NO PROBLEMS, WHY IN THE FUCK DO YOU WANT TO OUTLAW THEM?


IT'S LIKE RANDOMLY SAYING, "OH, WELL YOU DON'T REALLY NEED TO HAVE MORE THAN 180 HORSEPOWER TO MOVE THAT VAN SO I'M GOING TO MAKE IT ILLEGAL FOR AN ENGINE TO PRODUCE MORE THAN THAT."

"WELL, YOU DON'T REALLY NEED MORE THAN 10 HAMBURGERS IN A DAY, SO I CAN UNDERSTAND OUTLAWING PACKAGES THAT CONTAIN MORE THAN 10 HAMBURGERS."

"YOU DON'T REALLY NEED MORE THAN 5 GALLONS OF GAS TO GET ACROSS TOWN, SO I'M GOING TO OUTLAW ALL GAS TANKS LARGER THAN 5 GALLONS."

11/10/2008 11:32:34 AM

Quote :

"WELL, YOU DON'T REALLY NEED MORE THAN 10 HAMBURGERS IN A DAY, SO I CAN UNDERSTAND OUTLAWING PACKAGES THAT CONTAIN MORE THAN 10 HAMBURGERS."

lolololololol


so true

11/10/2008 11:34:13 AM

Search here for the "proof" that some of you require:

Quote :

"During the decades the American Rifleman has published 'The Armed Citizen' column, thousands of incidents of law-abiding Americans using firearms to halt or prevent crime have appeared in the magazine. Editorial space allowing, the total could have been far greater of course, as award-winning survey research shows that each year in the U.S. gun owners use firearms for protection as frequently as 2.5 million times. This archive contains 'Armed Citizen' entries from the present back to 1958. The database is searchable by key word and state and results are displayed in chronological order according to the month of publication in the American Rifleman."

http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/default.aspx

I can guarantee, however, that no matter how much "proof" is produced, some of you ass clowns will still post, "Yeah, but, but. . .FUCK BUSH!!!1" or "FUCK REPUBLICANS!!!1" or some such horseshit.

11/10/2008 11:47:59 AM

that sounds like a terpball argument

11/10/2008 11:49:46 AM

Even better, Obama definitely mislead voters on this issue (see the ad that ran in the last weeks of the election in NC, Penn, Virginia, etc.) If you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment, at least be honest about it.

11/10/2008 11:53:04 AM

^That's how Obama runs his campaigns, he misleads the voters. Ask Illinois residents what he said he would do to their taxes, and what he actually did...

11/10/2008 11:54:50 AM

this is your typical gun / anti-gun thread

a bunch of ignorant motherfuckers who are scared of guns because they probably don't know anything about them start calling everyone rednecks and idiots, then supposed rednecks and idiots completely pwn the shit out of every strawman argument the anti-gun people make

11/10/2008 11:57:30 AM

^ YEP, IT FITS THAT MOLD PERFECTLY SON.


KIND OF LIKE HOW MY LARGE PENIS FITS THE MOLD OF A SEXY CHICK'S VAG.

11/10/2008 11:58:06 AM

i will repeat myself, no one would rape these women posted on here ( except the blonde)

11/10/2008 12:03:02 PM

because these are the only possible rape victims

11/10/2008 12:07:30 PM

Quote :

"i will repeat myself, no one would rape these women posted on here ( except the blonde) "

keep on repeating your pointless and retarded drivel

when your fat ogre of a mother gets raped savagely and left to die in a gutter with a broom stick up her buttocks...you can repeat it 3 times in the mirror and it will most likely undo the crime

11/10/2008 12:19:24 PM

Did anyone answer my question yet?

How do you reduce gun violence if removing guns isn't the answer?

11/10/2008 12:21:01 PM

As Chris Rock said, we don't need gun control..we need bullet control.

11/10/2008 12:22:09 PM

^x3that post reminds me of this

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/crime_safety/story/1236862.html

Quote :

"The teen, Gavin John Clevesy, 17, of 311 Milky Way Drive, Apex, faces five felony charges, including first-degree rape and first-degree kidnapping, in the assault on the couple, who are in their 60s."

wtf is wrong with people?!?!

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:22 PM. Reason : etr]

11/10/2008 12:22:21 PM

you arm the citizens and the known threat of increased likelihood that your potential victim is both armed and trained would be the deterrent to violent criminals, particularly jackers and rapists

come on now

^yup i rememebr that one, want too damn long ago, i remember thinkin "how in the hell did this dude show up at the front door and do this?"


yea lets tighten gun laws

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:24 PM. Reason : e]

11/10/2008 12:23:11 PM

^^You're going to have a few very bad apples in a world of 7,000,000,000.


^So, you're telling me that if we gave every citizen in the United States a handgun that the amount of handgun deaths would go down?


[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:24 PM. Reason : got my carrot marks messed up]

11/10/2008 12:23:24 PM

THERE'S NO SEX IN VIOLENCE!!!

11/10/2008 12:23:30 PM

you people better watch what you say, or the secret service will be searching your place.

11/10/2008 12:24:28 PM

^^^^ I answered it, like, three pages ago. You just didn't like the answer.

11/10/2008 12:24:44 PM

Yes. im telling you that

and they are "carets" not fuckin "Carrots"


also, i stand corrected. handgun deaths wont go down....but that would be in direct correlation with rapes and robberies going down if you get my drift

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:27 PM. Reason : f]

11/10/2008 12:25:44 PM

And I'm sure all of those altercations that people mutter under their breath "if I only had a gun" will now end less violently once both people have the ability to kill each other.

11/10/2008 12:26:27 PM

^that's fucking stupid, just watch the video

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:27 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:27 PM. Reason : misread post]

11/10/2008 12:26:52 PM

Quote :

"I answered it, like, three pages ago. You just didn't like the answer."

WE ALL ANSWERED IT, HE JUST WANTS TO SIDETRACK THE CONVERSATION AS USUAL.

YOU AREN'T IMPORTANT God. NOW GO COWER IN A CORNER SON.

11/10/2008 12:27:43 PM

criminals will be less likely to start shit basically. just like police presence is a deterrent so will the threat of the armed citizen.

11/10/2008 12:28:18 PM

Quote :

"You're going to have a few very bad apples in a world of 7,000,000,000."

oh i know this.
the post just made me think of that.

and in that particular situation. catrastion would be fitting.
seriously. that kid should never reproduce.

yes. i said it.

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:29 PM. Reason : back to guns. sorry ]

11/10/2008 12:28:42 PM

From p. 4:

Quote :

"Calling people 'gun nuts' is very objective. I'm sure you'll get great responses with that approach. And, yes, more guns does mean less crime--more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens, that is. And how do you stop gun violence? By catching and locking up or executing those that commit such acts--and there are plenty of laws already on the books right now for this to happen. [Edited on November 10, 2008 at 9:59 AM. Reason : Do you refer to First Amendment supporters as 'speech nuts;?]"

Can you read?

11/10/2008 12:28:57 PM

rapes would not go down. more douchebags would have guns to hold women at bay, and more than likely women being raped wont have a gun, and no one with a gun would be around.

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:29 PM. Reason : ]

11/10/2008 12:29:06 PM

MY ANSWER TO God FROM PAGE 4:

Quote :

"THE LAWS NEED TO STAY EXACTLY LIKE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW IN NC IMO. OPEN CARRY IS ALLOWED, CONCEALED CARRY IS ALLOWED WITH A PERMIT. NO REGISTRATION REQUIRED (EXCEPT IN DURHAM COUNTY) AND WE HAVE STATE PREEMPTION SON. THE QUESTIONS YOU'RE POSING ARE RETARDED AND OLD. DOES EVERYONE YOU KNOW CARRY A GUN? NO?! WHAT IN THE FUCK MAKES YOU THINK THEY'D ALL GO BUY FIREARMS IF WE SIMPLY LEAVE THE LAWS LIKE THEY ARE? I'M NOT FOLLOWING YOUR "LOGIC." IF YOU WANT A GUN AND YOU'RE A LAW ABIDING CITIZEN, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE IT."

11/10/2008 12:29:50 PM

how do you reduce gun crimes?

- more police officers
- guns in the hands of law abiding citizens
- frying criminals, instead of some catch and release bullshit

11/10/2008 12:29:57 PM

well we are trying to make it more than likely that victims do have a gun and know their rights as citizens of this state

11/10/2008 12:30:51 PM

Quote :

"rapes would not go down. more douchebags would have guns to hold women at bay, and more than likely women being raped wont have a gun, and no one with a gun would be around."

DOES NOT COMPUTE

11/10/2008 12:31:05 PM

Let's say we made it a law: "Every citizen must have a handgun in the household."

So, we'd have a decrease in "criminals taking advantage of people not having a gun." That's a good thing.

but an increase of handgun accidents, kids shooting each other, people losing it over an altercation with a neighbor and starting a shootout, people losing their job and blowing their brains out.

And, the police would obviously start carrying around submachine guns and whatnot, because they have to "be one step above the general population." And with the police knowing that now every single car they pull over will have an armed citizen in the driver's seat... They're going to be nice and calm when pulling someone over, aren't they? I'm sure that would end well.

11/10/2008 12:31:12 PM

where the hell did the mandate come from?

im pretty sure the police approach every car the same, dumbass

what the hell to you think they ballerina twirl around the vehicle while throwing their guns in the creek?

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:32 PM. Reason : f]

11/10/2008 12:31:49 PM

there would be more gun deaths

but it would be innocent civilians killing robbers and rapists

you know, GOOD deaths

11/10/2008 12:32:15 PM

Quote :

"- more police officers"

Ahh yes, more police. That's exactly what we all want, right?

PAPERS, SCHNELL!

11/10/2008 12:32:28 PM

STOP RESPONDING TO HIM, HE IS MAKING RIDICULOUS ARGUMENTS AND CLAIMS.

NOBODY WANTS TO MANDATE THAT EVERYONE OWN A GUN.


ALTHOUGH THERE IS A TOWN IN GEORGIA WHERE THERE'S AN ORDINANCE THAT ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS MUST KEEP A GUN IN THEIR HOME. THE ORDINANCE IS NOT ENFORCED THOUGH.

11/10/2008 12:33:10 PM

^^you dont fuckin get it


hes not saying thats what people want, hes saying thats one way of decreasing gun crimes


since u made just ridicule of that, you go to #2 which was to arm the citizens


what say you now?

[Edited on November 10, 2008 at 12:34 PM. Reason : s]

11/10/2008 12:33:51 PM