Post: #26

(05-20-2016 04:00 PM)BIG BOSS Wrote:  The way these creeps clothe their intentions with a moral imperative is enough to make one sick.

Free, armed citizens threaten their control. They want their sheeple quiet, docile, and eager to offer their tax money for any and all insanities.

An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

Post: #27

(06-01-2016 06:14 PM)bigrich Wrote:  Imagine a future where the government restricts gun ownership but supplies everyone with affordable narcotics.

This sounds just like the Soviet Union. Food stamp cards for bread, butter, and vodka.

Post: #28

Big blow to second amendment in California and Hawaii:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/court-no-carr...39817.html

Quote:SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Dealing a blow to gun supporters, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday that Americans do not have a constitutional right to carry concealed weapons in public.

In a dispute that could ultimately wind up before the Supreme Court, a divided 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said local law enforcement officials can place significant restrictions on who is allowed to carry concealed guns.

"We hold that the Second Amendment does not preserve or protect a right of a member of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public," Circuit Judge William A. Fletcher wrote for the majority.

The ruling overturned a 2014 decision by a three-judge panel of the same court that said applicants need only express a desire for personal safety.

In a dissent, Circuit Judge Consuelo M. Callahan said the ruling "obliterates the Second Amendment's right to bear a firearm in some manner in public for self-defense."

Post: #29

I'm pretty upset with the bill so I'm going to go out an buy the guns I've been holding off buying on top of buying a couple of AR 15 lowers before the ban goes through.

What really annoys me about gun control people is that they decide on what laws to pass based on watching Hollywood movies. What then happens is gun markers figure out a way around the laws since the lawmakers don't know how guns work, e.g. the bullet button. And the cycle continues with lawmakers trying to ban any new modifications along the way of their end goal of banning all legal guns.

First off, "assault rifles" murders are far less all other guns and including knives.

Quote:The new crime statistics released by the agency[FBI] reveal that out of 11,961 murders performed within the U.S. in 2014, 660 were committed unarmed, 1,567 were committed with knives and only 248 murders were known to have been committed using rifles of any type, including single-shot long arms and “assault rifles” routinely demonized by gun control groups.
http://www.infowars.com/fbi-far-more-mur...lt-rifles/.

Second, this idea of needing only 10 bullets and the extra time to reload will allow people to tackle the person reloading is absolute bullshit.

1) Only 20-25% of bullets fired by police hit. Of that group of hits, maybe 25% actually stop the assailant. [video below cites various critical hit rates]

So,
10 X 20-25% = 2-2.5 hits
2 x 25%= .5-.625 critical hits

2) It doesn't take that long to reload. Even an amateur girl can reload faster than someone can run 15 feet also shown in the video below.

However, most people don't carry more than the magazine loaded in their gun, and if they do, maybe one extra. The magazine capacity restriction affects regular people more than criminals. If you look at mass shooters, they always come with a shitload of magazines for easy swapping. Also it's not like they can't get the full sized magazines illegally.

Post: #30

Quote:The California state Senate voted 28-8 Wednesday to exempt itself from the pointless gun-control laws that apply to the rest of the populace. Legislators apparently think they alone are worthy to pack heat on the streets for personal protection, and the masses ought to wait until the police arrive.

The rules for thee, and not for me. Silence, peasant, and hand over your gun.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016...z4BJvJEIrt

Post: #31

^

I was going to post that story here but the Washington Times article quoted is from 2011. Not that it makes it any better, but it's not news, so I'm not sure why I'm seeing it pop up on gun blogs and conservative sites today.

Post: #32

Ah, I failed to notice that. My bad.