What do you think of the ban on certain types of guns being lifted?

I think that will suck majorly.


Although many people will probably disagree with Me,

I think that most types of ranged weaponry are cowardly.

That is not the focus of this thread though. The thread is the thoughts,comments, and opinions of people about the weapons ban being lifted.

that's nice :)

As a gun purchaser, I have been waiting for this day. A gun collection just isn't complete without an assault weapon.

The only comment I have to say is to be prepared for those who will take advantage of this for evil sake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by countessnichole

The only comment I have to say is to be prepared for those who will take advantage of this for evil sake.

---

The chances of any of us being gunned down with a Tec9 or Uzi is awfully slim.
Did killing of innocent people stop since the ban was in effect in 1994? What is "evil"? That would seem relative.

i saw a bumper sticker that related guns to wooden spoons it went something like this: "if they outlawed wooden spoons only criminals would have wooden spoons"

personally i know you have to draw the line somewhere but in the end it is people that kill people not guns. if you give the wrong person a lamborgini they can loose control and get into an accident if you give the wrong person a hunting knife they can carry it arround "for protection" but then again what do i know i'm the type who feels uncomfortable around any weapon thats not inteneded for going to a shooting range.

All I want for christmas is an CAR-15...And some ammo...

My collection is gonna get a alot better...

eeps - DO NOT get me started on this subject!!!!!!!!!! too late. already did. I just had a rather lengthy discussion about this not too long ago on a different forum, so I'll quickly go over the details again here.

*sigh*

People who don't know anything about guns are fretting for no reason right now because the assault weapon ban being lifted, and it's because they have a lack of understanding what an "assault weapon" is. The words "assault weapon" just sound scary and bad. An assault weapon is something that has a folding or telescopic stock, a bayonet mount, a flash suppressor or threaded barrel, or a pistol grip protruding from beneath the stock, etc.

People think that because of this ban being lifted, it means that suddenly everyone can go out and buy fully automatic weapons and go tearing ass through the streets emptying rounds into people's heads, which isn't, nor has that ever been the case. The whole reason the flash suppressor part was added to the law, was because ignorant politicans thought that a flash suppressor hides the muzzle flash from whoever you're shooting at. Which of course is impossible. It's there to reduce the flash to the shooter. As for the bayonet attachment, I've never heard of anyone using a bayonet attached to a rifle to kill anyone in the civilain world. It's ridiculous. It's like sticking a knife to the end of a bicycle and trying to stab someone with it. It's just not practical.

And you know those silly Ak-47's and UZI's people are crying about being back on the streets, guess what - they've always been there. They've been there since the ban was in place: just the ones that don't have a flash suppressor or a bayonet lug.

An "assault weapon" is not a fully automatic machinegun.

Lets take a look at the AR-15, shall we?

http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/w...s/pcwa2s20.jpg

since it looks almost exactly like the military version (the M-16 and it's varients) was specifically sited as dangerous, harmful to own, blah, blah, blah. .......But the Ruger Mini-14:

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firear...oducts/33L.gif

which shoots exactly the same caliber ammunition, can handle 30 round magazines, but doesn't have a pistol grip, and is a wooden (aka 'old fashioned looking' and therefore 'not as harmful'?) rifle, apparently is safe to own, and hooray! everything is ok in the world.

Make all the laws in the world and it won't change a thing. A lot of gun laws are just a false sense of security. Criminals do not legally register and fill out all the paperwork for their firearms. Paperwork and laws do not stop criminals from obtaining their guns. Paperwork and laws do not make a criminal stop in his or her tracks and say "Hey, I'm not supposed to be shooting this guy right now because this gun is illegal! I'd better stop."
Besides, have you ever seen the people that make up gun clubs for owners legally owning machine guns? It's usually extremely rich old white dudes that have nothing better to do than go fire off a Vickers machine gun in a field somewhere, not straight thuggin' it down on the corner.

Sorry for the long winded rant.

I already said I dont really know the details about most types of guns, even though I dont really like them. I do have preferences for those that I do like though.

I think this another rifle doesn't look cool and nobody will probably buy it (I mean most of the people as most of them are dum)... but firsth one is cool and is dangerous..... what do you think, which one you gonna see more in movies (hollywood kind of), firsth (cool one) or second one (old school)

so probably these people that puted these laws together watched too much of these gangsta movies as kids (maybe livin' them in they own neighbourhood:)) or even something totaly another.... but they growned up on that trip anyway.... cool one and not-so-cool one (that looks like rifle that I got in my army... almost like ak47, just this one have full wooden body, what is even bether than firsth one)

The ban needs to be extended.......... or made permanent........ But then again I'm a treehuggingbleedingheartliberalcommiepinko as most shitkickers would say

hewhoisagod.. just wondering why you think the ban needs to be extended or permanent? Is the lack of a flash suppresor saving anyone's life? I'm wondering how you think that will help anything? As I just explained in my big long post up there, the only thing the ban is holding back are basically guns with things like flash suppressors to reduce flash to the shooter, and bayonet lugs so you can stick a little sharp do-hickey on the end of your (most likely antique) rifle.
I'm trying not to fly off onto a tirade here... I'm just tired of hearing people who know absolutely NOTHING about guns proclaim that they know what the laws should be and what types of things should be banned. Yes, yes, yes, in a perfect world there would be no guns, I know that. In a perfect world there would be no rocks or sticks to throw at people either, and there would be no air pollution and nobody would smoke cigarettes and die of lung cancer.

It amazes me that people will stomp their feet and make a fuss and crap their pants over something as COSMETIC as a law about the attachments on a rifle because in their minds they think it means we're all going to be allowed to buy fully automatic weapons, yet they'll sit back while their best friend buys a pack of cigarettes - something that is sure to kill them.

I'm glad the ban expired.

I plan on becoming a Prosecutor someday, (I Interned there last summer, and a drug dealer put a $50K hit out on my boss.)

I want the best guns possible to kill anyone that tries to hurt me or my family.

ALSO, I want to be able to buy an AR-15 for my little brother and sister to train on before their deployments to Iraq, or wherever they go in the future. (I'd like to get an XM-8 in a few years)


As for ranged weaponry being dishonorable, what honor is there in allowing criminals to harm civilians?

If two opponents agreed to use only bladed weapons, that's one thing.

However, given that everyone knows that guns exist, Criminals have fair warning that they may face their end in the comission of a crime.

(Oh, and BTW Machine Guns have been banned since 1934, and continue to be Banned... THe "Assault weapons Ban" didn't actually ban assault weapons. None of the weapons manned were automatic.)

god i cant wait to bag a deer with my brand new AK-74 (not AK-47 those things suck) Yipeeeeeee :beermug:

It is my firmly held belief that the second amendment to the constitution was put in place to ensure that the common people of our country had the right and ability to defend themselves against tyranny and outside or unlawful aggressors. Our country was built by rebels and and rugged individuals. I think they intended to instill that tradition in the new system they laid out for us. The people are, to some degree, an integral part of our system of checks and balances, and if they have no power, the country could more easily slip towards the oppression of it's own powerless people. Our forefathers had seen it happen before and wanted to protect us against that fate.

Now, as in any area of our constitution, there are logistical problems presented by the advancement of technology. Guns are not what they used to be. Putting them in the hand of the common man is to give a great deal of power and responsibility. That can be a scary thing. However, with reasonable training, much like a car or tractor or motorcycle, I think it would not be massively detrimental to our society if many of us had the option to be well armed.

I think using the rule of law to 'protect' us from the lowest common denominator and worst case scenario just serves to weaken us as a people.

very well spoken, forrestblack.

Then why do so many police officers want the ban..?
Look- Canada has like one tenth the murder rate we do..as does Japan and Europe---those countries- if anything- have much more functional democracies than we do..
Why does anyone not in the military or police need to own such weapons..going to shoot down some geese with an Uzi?
P.

Essentially people get theese weapons because they like to collect them i know a guy that owns an MP5 and he never takes the fuckin thing out of his safe i guess if gun collectors want assault weapon the more pwer to them since they are illegal to carry anyways at least where im from but honestly no one really fuckin needs them and now more criminals will be able to get thier hands on the damn things

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pedar

Then why do so many police officers want the ban..?
Look- Canada has like one tenth the murder rate we do..as does Japan and Europe---those countries- if anything- have much more functional democracies than we do..
Why does anyone not in the military or police need to own such weapons..going to shoot down some geese with an Uzi?
P.

---

Did you not read what I wrote Pedar? I don't think so called assault weapons have a damn thing to do with hunting geese. The second amendment does not specify that it protects our right to hunt animals. If I were going to hunt deer, I'd do it with a spear or a bat, because I think that's the only way I feel it would be a contest. I think the assault weapon issue is really about semantics anyway. It's like calling a protester a terrorist because you may have found a smoke bomb on or near him. It sounds more threatening and is more likely to be able to be dealt with harshly, but were they really a larger threat after you gave them a scary name?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForrestBlack

Did you not read what I wrote Pedar? I don't think so called assault weapons have a damn thing to do with hunting geese. The second amendment does not specify that it protects our right to hunt animals. If I were going to hunt deer, I'd do it with a spear or a bat, because I think that's the only way I feel it would be a contest. I think the assault weapon issue is really about semantics anyway. It's like calling a protester a terrorist because you may have found a smoke bomb on or near him. It sounds more threatening and is more likely to be able to be dealt with harshly, but were they really a larger threat after you gave them a scary name?

---

actually they (assault weapons) are more dangerous because typically it is much easier to modify them into fully automatic weapons because they are designed to be fired that way versus converting say a baretta 9mm into an automatic which is possible but would take a lot more time and equipment and is more dangerous to the user wereas i (having very little experince) could easily convert a legal (semi-auto) AK-47 into a fully functional and (relatively) safe automatic weapon cheaply within a matter of hours

Well, law enforcement want the ban, because even though a lot of totally sane people might own these weapons, the nutjobs will get them also. You always see things where some nutjob is barricaded in their house, holding their family hostage, and the police have to deal with it. So if the nutjob is a gun collector, they will now have some pretty awesome weaponry. And it makes it a lot harder for the cops to deal with the situation. They now have guns that are a lot better, or at least equal to what the cops have. Most cops would prefer it if all guns were banned, even though they tend to like guns themselves. It's just that they deal with people with guns all the time, and for them, it sucks. They would much rather deal with people with knives, and they have the guns. But I agree 100% that it is people who kill people, and it does not matter what you ban. If you ban all weapons, people will make their own. Look at prison. They ban all weapons there, and they have cops and guards everywhere. But people still manage to make weapons, and kill each other... So I just think that it would be money better spent, if we could improve other aspects of society, like education, parenting, mental health, etc... If we could create a more peaceful society, things would be better. A good example is some of the european countries. I can't remember which one it is, but one of them requires all men to join the armed forces for several years, and at the end of their service, they become part of the national militia, and they are required to take their fully automatic assasult rifle home with them after their service is over. So pretty much every home in that one country, has an assault rifle in it. But they are a peaceful socitety. So they have very low rates of gun crime and murder. VERY low. Like a couple per year, across the entire country... So it is obvious that the problem is not with the guns, but with the American people. So if they want to do something about gun crime, they need to work on fixing our society, not banning guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForrestBlack

Did you not read what I wrote Pedar? I don't think so called assault weapons have a damn thing to do with hunting geese. The second amendment does not specify that it protects our right to hunt animals. If I were going to hunt deer, I'd do it with a spear or a bat, because I think that's the only way I feel it would be a contest. I think the assault weapon issue is really about semantics anyway. It's like calling a protester a terrorist because you may have found a smoke bomb on or near him. It sounds more threatening and is more likely to be able to be dealt with harshly, but were they really a larger threat after you gave them a scary name?

---

Sure I read your post..but since we live near each other-why don't you read today's excellent LA Times editorial- assault weapons have been used - in school grounds, in N. Hollywood bank shootouts, at Columbine!!
Why do we need them? What's the point?
And again why are so many cops in favor of the ban.?
Believe me --names don't scare me..P

Given criminals never follow such bans and black market gun running has never been all that effected by this (even if you're convicted of it you'll serve less than a 1/4th of the sentance you get) bans are useless...

The argument that "Bad people will do bad things with them" is pathetic...recently a nutjob went on a killing spree with a basic knife in a kindergarden. Bad people will use ANYTHING they can inflict harm...bannign things has no effect on them.

Look at Oklahoma...the prick abused chemicals in fertalizer.

Me...I WANT an assult rifle...I'm not a fan of unarmed societies and would prefer to know the guy next to me is well armed. Guns aren't the problem...people are. Besides...most crimes are commited with weapons bought and sold illegally...and at times the same weapons in one crime find their way into use for another by other hands. Criminal culture has it's own ways around all this...always will.

But hey if banning a big bad gun makes you feel safe...then you're just buying into some naive safety net that does not save you from anything.

The N.Hollywood bank shoot out was a disaster for the police not being armed as they should have and to their credit they had been saying that for years...it was only after that disaster that anyone listened and gave into their demands for better weaponry.

Automatic guns don't magically make you more lethal...anyone who knows how to fire a gun can make a semi-auto much more of a body count inducing weapon...again..it's the people who use them maliciously that is the problem.

As far as hunting with such weapons...most do not since it ruins the animal as a torphy or food...only bullshit stories of drunken rednecks seem to be the focus in such arguments. Many hunters I've known enjoy the hunt itself...and like to show off their skill. Hunting is not the simple "good ole boy" sport dismissed by the bleeding heart animal lovers...it has a wide range of practitioners and guidelines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForrestBlack

I think using the rule of law to 'protect' us from the lowest common denominator and worst case scenario just serves to weaken us as a people.

---

Lately that's all laws seem to be for...to "protect us" from these people and few stand up to argue the fact we lose many freedoms that way...look at any nation that has dismarmed it's society...bad things have happend years later.

It was a big thing for Hitler and Stalin to disarm the people...and look what happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tequila Zaire

Given criminals never follow such bans and black market gun running has never been all that effected by this (even if you're convicted of it you'll serve less than a 1/4th of the sentance you get) bans are useless...

The argument that "Bad people will do bad things with them" is pathetic...recently a nutjob went on a killing spree with a basic knife in a kindergarden. Bad people will use ANYTHING they can inflict harm...bannign things has no effect on them.

Look at Oklahoma...the prick abused chemicals in fertalizer.

Me...I WANT an assult rifle...I'm not a fan of unarmed societies and would prefer to know the guy next to me is well armed. Guns aren't the problem...people are. Besides...most crimes are commited with weapons bought and sold illegally...and at times the same weapons in one crime find their way into use for another by other hands. Criminal culture has it's own ways around all this...always will.

But hey if banning a big bad gun makes you feel safe...then you're just buying into some naive safety net that does not save you from anything.

The N.Hollywood bank shoot out was a disaster for the police not being armed as they should have and to their credit they had been saying that for years...it was only after that disaster that anyone listened and gave into their demands for better weaponry.

Automatic guns don't magically make you more lethal...use them maliciously that is the problem.

As far as hunting with such weapons...most do not since it ruins the animal as a torphy or food...only bullshit stories of drunken rednecks seem to be the focus in such arguments. Many hunters I've known enjoy the hunt itself...and like to show off their skill. Hunting is not the simple "good ole boy" sport dismissed by the bleeding heart animal lovers...it has a wide range of practitioners and guidelines.

---

Then let's allow people to drive drunk..since what difference will any bans, make -right...? P>

Well said. I dont really think the banning really protects people in lots of cases. The part that I think sucks is that another gun type will be available again, although if you knew were to search, it wasnt un-available techinically.

Example is that in the 20's , Alchohol was banned. That just made the stuff more profitable for criminals to sell,etc. If they made more drugs legal, regardless of whether people use them, then the "criminals would loose money, because people could buy the stuff over the counter.

Bah! That probably didnt convey the message the way I wanted to, though I would explain My opinion if any expo was needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pedar

Then let's allow people to drive drunk..since what difference will any bans, make -right...? P>

---

Uhm, I think it should be a crime to use guns drunk as well. Lots of people are killed with cars, but we don't ban them. We only ask that people use them properly and we punish those that don't. You could prevent drunk driving by banning cars, but would that really be what's best for us all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pedar

Sure I read your post..but since we live near each other-why don't you read today's excellent LA Times editorial- assault weapons have been used - in school grounds, in N. Hollywood bank shootouts...

---

If that is the N.Hollywood bank job I'm thinking of, the outgunned police were able to address the bank robbers once they raided a local gun store and got better guns. Had they not been available, more cops would have died.

Plus the guns those N. Hollyuwood guys were using were not legal assault weapons.
They were totally illegal fully automatic weapons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForrestBlack

Uhm, I think it should be a crime to use guns drunk as well. Lots of people are killed with cars, but we don't ban them. We only ask that people use them properly and we punish those that don't. You could prevent drunk driving by banning cars, but would that really be what's best for us all?

---

Cars are a necessity- that's how we and most of world gets around..Europe has cars yet no assault weapons..much safer place.P.

There are a couple guns I'd like to get if I wanted one............. but I'm more of a Bow and Arrow person myself, but personally I don't like guns, and probably never will either.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForrestBlack

If that is the N.Hollywood bank job I'm thinking of, the outgunned police were able to address the bank robbers once they raided a local gun store and got better guns. Had they not been available, more cops would have died.

---

Luckily no cops died..just think if there wasn't an active gun industry manufacturing those weapons..they wouldn't have had to raid a gun store..
Again just watching the shows tonight..every fucking cop is on tv so upset up the ban expiring..what do they know that you don't?
P.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheDeathKnight

Plus the guns those N. Hollyuwood guys were using were not legal assault weapons.
They were totally illegal fully automatic weapons.

---

So let's stop manufacturing the things like candy..that way they don't wind up on the black market..P.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hewhoisagod

There are a couple guns I'd like to get if I wanted one............. but I'm more of a Bow and Arrow person myself, but personally I don't like guns, and probably never will either.......

---

It's a lot harder to pull off schoolyard massacres and bank robberies with bows and arrows..P.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrightStar

Well said. I dont really think the banning really protects people in lots of cases. The part that I think sucks is that another gun type will be available again, although if you knew were to search, it wasnt un-available techinically.

Example is that in the 20's , Alchohol was banned. That just made the stuff more profitable for criminals to sell,etc. If they made more drugs legal, regardless of whether people use them, then the "criminals would loose money, because people could buy the stuff over the counter.

Bah! That probably didnt convey the message the way I wanted to, though I would explain My opinion if any expo was needed.

---

It's a question of pragmatics..it's not realistic to ban most substances..since as you correctly say- it breeds a black market..they are generally easier to grow and manufacture - all one needs is a basement or a backyard..
manufacturing weaponry is something that requires large scale intensive industry and can be much more easily regulated..
P.

Take a look at S. Central Los Angeles in the US- everyone is armed to the teeth there..most people are packing-- anyone here want to move down there?
How about Somalia? Every male carries an AK47 at all times..boy what a safe place that is..!
P.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pedar

Take a look at S. Central Los Angeles in the US- everyone is armed to the teeth there..most people are packing-- anyone here want to move down there?
How about Somalia? Every male carries an AK47 at all times..boy what a safe place that is..!
P.

---

Dude come on...you KNOW there are more problems in South Central than just guns...so please don't try to make guns the only issue effecting that area.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pedar

Cars are a necessity- that's how we and most of world gets around..Europe has cars yet no assault weapons..much safer place.P.

---

Uh, no it's not. Look at the hard statistics...it's not safer and lets see...how many fucking wars have they fought in less than 200 years? If you're gonna go down this path and logic you're in for a painful trip my friend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tequila Zaire

Dude come on...you KNOW there are more problems in South Central than just guns...so please don't try to make guns the only issue effecting that area.

---

So you beg a good question- What is the problem there? And you KNOW that guns factor into it big time..
- P.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrightStar

Example is that in the 20's , Alchohol was banned.
.

---

That's a great example how banning something makes things worse for all.