Assault Weapons Ban 2008 bill

What do you think about the 2008 Permanent Assault Weapons ban bill?


  • Total voters
    88

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
This time, it will not expire in 10 years, it will be permanent.

This also includes handguns over 50oz, handguns with more than 10 rounds, handguns with magazines that extend below the grip, handguns with a threaded barrel, etc....

Not to mention, the "usual suspects" a lot of shotguns, rifles, all AKs, All ARs, etc....

However, you can buy as much as you want and keep it before they ban them, you need not turn them in.

Support or Oppose?

If you vote, please post why you oppose it support it.


Full text here, I read it all, completely retarded.

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
 
NateWA

NateWA

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Im a democrat. But I firmly oppose this. Im about to graduate college and get a job.. . eventually I will buy a house and I sure as **** would like to be able to protect it
 
NateWA

NateWA

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Ive been wanting an AR for sometime now...
 
firefighter2032

firefighter2032

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
I oppose it because anytime you ban something like this from people, you are only taking it away from the law abiding citizens.
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
This poll is for Americans only, right now, it's 100% opposed since Somewhatgifted is not American.
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
This also includes handguns over 50oz, handguns with more than 10 rounds, handguns with magazines that extend below the grip, handguns with a threaded barrel, etc...
WTF! They define handguns with over 10 rounds as ASSAULT WEAPONS? WTF, that's like half the guns out there.

I voted oppose because its the right thing to do. Putting guns in responsible people's hands makes everyone safer.
 

futurepilot

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Nobody goes squirrel hunting with an Ar-15, or an ak-47. You dont need them. There is no infringement on your 2nd amendment rights because the 2nd amendment refers to a well regulated Militia. There is no precedence for those out there who imagine defending their home with an assault weapon rambo style, its just not reality.
 
crawlinmatt

crawlinmatt

New member
Awards
0
Nobody goes squirrel hunting with an Ar-15, or an ak-47. You dont need them. There is no infringement on your 2nd amendment rights because the 2nd amendment refers to a well regulated Militia. There is no precedence for those out there who imagine defending their home with an assault weapon rambo style, its just not reality.
I vote aginst

Well...........actually an AR style weapon is awsome for squirrel and other varmit hunting. I take it you think an AR style weapon in .223 caliber form is more dangerous than a semi-auto .30-06. why because the military has them? well news flash the .223 or 5.56mm caliber sucks for killing humans. they are very far from high powered. Im against any gun law especially since criminals will always use what ever they want anyway. Besides would you rob a convience store knowing that the possibility of more than one person is concealed carrying in it. I agree about RAMBO its a hollywood thing not a real life thing.
 
Last edited:

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Nobody goes squirrel hunting with an Ar-15, or an ak-47. You dont need them. There is no infringement on your 2nd amendment rights because the 2nd amendment refers to a well regulated Militia. There is no precedence for those out there who imagine defending their home with an assault weapon rambo style, its just not reality.
I have made this point countless times here but no one listens sadly
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Nobody goes squirrel hunting with an Ar-15, or an ak-47. You dont need them. There is no infringement on your 2nd amendment rights because the 2nd amendment refers to a well regulated Militia. There is no precedence for those out there who imagine defending their home with an assault weapon rambo style, its just not reality.
This is what the 2nd Amendment says.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Keep in mind, that the Bill of Rights is protects the liberties of INDIVIDUALS from that of the Federal Government (now increased to State and Local governments). In no way was the Bill of Rights created to protect the freedoms of groups like MILITIAS.
 

futurepilot

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Besides would you rob a convience store knowing that the possibility of more than one person is concealed carrying in it. I agree about RAMBO its a hollywood thing not a real life thing.
Im not a gun expert so I can't comment on the lethality of one gun vs another.

Anyone robbing anything/anywhere obviously isnt worried about possible reprecussion, so no, I dont think they would be detered.
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Im not a gun expert so I can't comment on the lethality of one gun vs another.
Basically, any gun can kill. The question is whether it takes you one bullet or several bullets to kill and how many people you can take out without reloading.

I will say that many popular handguns such as Sig Sauers and Glocks carry more than 10 bullets in their standard models and this ban would outlaw those weapons.

Anyone robbing anything/anywhere obviously isnt worried about possible reprecussion, so no, I dont think they would be detered.
I disagree. Most violent criminals focus on the immediate repercussions of their actions, while losing sight of the possible long term consequences of their behavior. Knowing that anyone around you may have a gun, is definitely an immediate consequence.
 

futurepilot

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Keep in mind, that the Bill of Rights is protects the liberties of INDIVIDUALS from that of the Federal Government (now increased to State and Local governments). In no way was the Bill of Rights created to protect the freedoms of groups like MILITIAS.

I think you may be mis-interpreting something. The 2nd amendment does not say "any body who want a gun can have one." It says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Thats plain english to me: because a well regulated militia is neccesary, the government can not take away it members guns. No reference to individuals not part of a regulated militia.
 
VolcomX311

VolcomX311

Legend
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
I oppose it because anytime you ban something like this from people, you are only taking it away from the law abiding citizens.
I oppose for this same reason. The people who handle guns in dangerous manners now (gangs) already get it illegitimately. Banning guns would only ban it from the law biters, while leaving it to the law breakers. I think house robberies would be drastically deduced if there were a 50/50 chance that someone inside will shoot to kill if you're caught in their house.

That neighbor in Texas who shot the two young men robbing his neighbors house, American Hero.
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Im not a gun expert so I can't comment on the lethality of one gun vs another.

Anyone robbing anything/anywhere obviously isnt worried about possible reprecussion, so no, I dont think they would be detered.
Do you live in a really good neighborhood?

2 houses I lived in have been burglarized when I was not there(this includes the one I live in now) 2 attempted robberies that I stopped on myself, 1 I stopped for someone who knew someone was coming after them and I stayed with them for 3 days and DID stop them from attacking them, while the cops did NOTHING to protect this person "we can't do anything, till something happens..." how comforting :rolleyes:

"Studies indicate that firearms are used over 2 million times a year for personal protection, and that the presence of a firearm, without a shot being fired, prevents crime in many instances. Shooting usually can be justified only where crime constitutes an immediate, imminent threat to life, limb, or, in some cases, property. Anyone is free to quote or reproduce these accounts." Armed Citizen


Have you ever been shot? shot at? I have, luckily, the only injury I had was from a hollow point of a 9mm fragment that grazed me, you know how dead I would've been without my gun?

Ever been stabbed? bad f**king feeling, I defended myself just with my knife, you know if the guy had a gun and I didn't or 1 or 2 more guys had a knife how dead I would've been?

I hate people who say retarded sh*t like that, I always hope people like you and your families get raped and robbed then you can consider firearm laws because honestly, people's opinion's on gun laws do change after that.

If something I'm doing now, perfectly legal(carrying my sidearm which has 15 rounds) suddenly becomes illegal, I'm still gonna carry it, I'm not a criminal, but this f**king country wants me to be one, I'll be one.
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
I oppose for this same reason. The people who handle guns in dangerous manners now (gangs) already get it illegitimately. Banning guns would only ban it from the law biters, while leaving it to the law breakers. I think house robberies would be drastically deduced if there were a 50/50 chance that someone inside will shoot to kill if you're caught in their house.

That neighbor in Texas who shot the two young men robbing his neighbors house, American Hero.
Yeah buddy!

It is f**king retarded how hey want to enforce more laws.....when the gun issues stem from criminals.......which don't care about existing laws....what makes em think, more laws will help? f**king idiots :hammer:

Hell, the incident above where I stayed with that guy for 3 days, the attacked was a convicted felon! he had a firearm, he committed:

-Felon in possession of a firearm
-Carrying concealed firearm
-Aggrevated assault with a firearm

Not to mention other charges not related to me/my friend, do you think more laws will stop that kinda ****...please..:rolleyes:
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Sorry if I came all jacked up on this post.

BUT, you people don't understand that there are people who really need their guns because of where they live and work and don't give me that BS about cops being there to protect you.

So by you voting away our gun rights and carry rights, you endanger our lives, therefor, I wish the worst most horrible to be committed on you as you vote them, to be committed on us.

That's all.
 

futurepilot

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I hate people who say retarded sh*t like that, I always hope people like you and your families get raped and robbed then you can consider firearm laws because honestly, people's opinion's on gun laws do change after that.
Your obviously an extremely intelligent, worldly person, with an ability to reason that far exceeds my own.
 
ShadowFury

ShadowFury

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Completely agree with Omen.

If you think it's extreme, then you are obviously not thinking much of this whole thing through.

When it comes down to your life, I think I would rather have my gun. This won't stop criminals, only the innocent citizens. Criminals are criminals because they break the law(s), what makes people think they will stop doing it because our oh-so-great government passes a pathetic law?
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Your obviously an extremely intelligent, worldly person, with an ability to reason that far exceeds my own.
Thank you for your kind words.

I only wish upon you what's happened to me and other people so you can change your mind....however I have no intention or desire to do that to you, I'm sure there are people out there who will though, the UCR, NIBRS and other crime reporting systems statistics support my views.

John Lott and David Mustard, in connection with the University of Chicago Law School, examining crime statistics from 1977 to 1992 for all U.S. counties, concluded that the thirty-one states allowing their residents to carry concealed, had significant reductions in violent crime. Lott writes, "Our most conservative estimates show that by adopting shall-issue laws, states reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%. If those states that did not permit concealed handguns in 1992 had permitted them back then, citizens might have been spared approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies. To put it even more simply criminals, we found, respond rationally to deterrence threats... While support for strict gun-control laws usually has been strongest in large cities, where crime rates are highest, that's precisely where right-to-carry laws have produced the largest drops in violent crimes."

A gun is responsible for murder as much as a car is for murder, the issue at hand here is to make sure guns stay out of the wrong hands and stay in the right ones.
 
poison

poison

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Nobody goes squirrel hunting with an Ar-15, or an ak-47. You dont need them. There is no infringement on your 2nd amendment rights because the 2nd amendment refers to a well regulated Militia. There is no precedence for those out there who imagine defending their home with an assault weapon rambo style, its just not reality.
The problem is the basis of the ban is pretty much 'it looks scary'. Take a rifle, add a pistol grip, and viola!, it's now illegal. The reasoning? It's reminiscent of military gear, so it MUST be more deadly!

The problem with your argument is this: ok, so I don't need an assault rifle. Why do I need a shotgun? Why isn't a revolver enough? Why do I need a gun at all?

Tell me? Why do you suppose I 'imagine' myself defending my property with an 'assault rifle' like 'Rambo'? Why those terms? If I use a revolver, will I defend it like a cowboy? Do you think I'm salivating, dreaming, just WAITING blow someone away, because, well, I own guns, I MUST think like that?

Are you sure I don't 'imagine' myself finishing the rest of my days in peace and quiet with my two baby girls, never having fired a shot? Are you sure that if I use a legal non-assault weapon to defend my kids, I won't do so in a 'rambo-ish' manner? Does the gun dictate my 'attitude'? Will I kill less without a pistol grip or hicap mag? If I kill someone with a .32, is it somehow different than if I killed him with an AR?

Yeah, right.

The 'Assault weapon' bans are written by utter retards.
 
poison

poison

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Basically, any gun can kill. The question is whether it takes you one bullet or several bullets to kill and how many people you can take out without reloading.
Not aimed at you, but just commenting on the magazine limitations: WTF? So reloading is somehow some magic panacea that will give me pause to see the error of my ways, or something? I can rip off a magazine change in under a second. Yeah, I'm pretty well trained by professionals on handguns. If I want to do damage, ten round mags won't be what stops me.


I disagree. Most violent criminals focus on the immediate repercussions of their actions, while losing sight of the possible long term consequences of their behavior. Knowing that anyone around you may have a gun, is definitely an immediate consequence.
Proven fact. /thread.
 
poison

poison

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
I oppose for this same reason. The people who handle guns in dangerous manners now (gangs) already get it illegitimately.
Proven fact.

The liberals know this, yet expect us to weather the odds, or take our chances. I guess it's cool, because when my kids are fatherless, the gov't can just redistribute some wealth my kids direction. Peachy!
 
poison

poison

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
BTW, I LOVE how FrontSite has a banner at the bottom of this thread. **** YEAH, yeehaw!


lol
 
GotTest

GotTest

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
I am against ANY weapons ban.
A weapon is only as deadly as the person holding it.

A pencil can be a weapon. Ask any correctional officer.
 
NateWA

NateWA

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
This is a retarded ban anyway. Its not really a ban if everything is grandfathered in. So you mean I can go the day before the ban and buy 10 assault rifles and then the next day I can still have them. yeah that sounds like a ban to me.
 
NateWA

NateWA

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Most of the gun owners I know are some of the best, nicest, most upstanding individuals I have ever met. What is the world gaining by taking their guns away.
 
NateWA

NateWA

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
so im looking at the ban. Are they proposing to ban all the guns listed? cause Im looking at a list of shotguns and there is like every model shotgun ever made on this list.... They are even trying to ban single shot shotguns?

EDIT: Nevermind Apendix A is what it doesnt apply to
 
NateWA

NateWA

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
It looks like it actually would expire 10 years from the day they pass it.
 
whiskers

whiskers

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
No collection is nice, but the ban of sale still makes me sick.


They will never stop inching this sh!t on us. If they took our guns in one sweep we'd flip out, so they do it in increments.

I voted "oppose."

A well armed populous is the best defense against tyranny.


Thomas Jefferson: "Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry."
It is tyranny to ban the sale of any weapons, tase proof fabric and body armor, to the public when law enforcement uses them.




I am also extremely opposed to "Gun Free Zones." What jack@ss came up with that idea? The lack of logic there is astounding.
 
whiskers

whiskers

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Nobody goes squirrel hunting with an Ar-15, or an ak-47. You dont need them. There is no infringement on your 2nd amendment rights because the 2nd amendment refers to a well regulated Militia. There is no precedence for those out there who imagine defending their home with an assault weapon rambo style, its just not reality.
The whole point of the second amendment is so you can protect yourself if the government gets out of line.
For that reason, it is unjustifiable to allow the state to posses superior weapons.

I plan to have an AR15 by the end of the week :)
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Not aimed at you, but just commenting on the magazine limitations: WTF? So reloading is somehow some magic panacea that will give me pause to see the error of my ways, or something? I can rip off a magazine change in under a second. Yeah, I'm pretty well trained by professionals on handguns. If I want to do damage, ten round mags won't be what stops me.
No I understand exactly what you are saying. What I was saying is that based on that fact that 10 bullets in a handgun is the cutoff is that bill, so that is the criteria they're going on.
 
crawlinmatt

crawlinmatt

New member
Awards
0
Do you live in a really good neighborhood?

2 houses I lived in have been burglarized when I was not there(this includes the one I live in now) 2 attempted robberies that I stopped on myself, 1 I stopped for someone who knew someone was coming after them and I stayed with them for 3 days and DID stop them from attacking them, while the cops did NOTHING to protect this person "we can't do anything, till something happens..." how comforting :rolleyes:

"Studies indicate that firearms are used over 2 million times a year for personal protection, and that the presence of a firearm, without a shot being fired, prevents crime in many instances. Shooting usually can be justified only where crime constitutes an immediate, imminent threat to life, limb, or, in some cases, property. Anyone is free to quote or reproduce these accounts." Armed Citizen


Have you ever been shot? shot at? I have, luckily, the only injury I had was from a hollow point of a 9mm fragment that grazed me, you know how dead I would've been without my gun?

Ever been stabbed? bad f**king feeling, I defended myself just with my knife, you know if the guy had a gun and I didn't or 1 or 2 more guys had a knife how dead I would've been?

I hate people who say retarded sh*t like that, I always hope people like you and your families get raped and robbed then you can consider firearm laws because honestly, people's opinion's on gun laws do change after that.

If something I'm doing now, perfectly legal(carrying my sidearm which has 15 rounds) suddenly becomes illegal, I'm still gonna carry it, I'm not a criminal, but this f**king country wants me to be one, I'll be one.

Omen, Dude Your a ****ing wild man.... mad props:head:.....are you prior service? If even 15% of americans took self defense seriously i truely believe violent crimes would decline. You are not only defending yourself but others around you. You dont even have to physically act in a situation, by keeping your cool and understanding the situation you can help the police or who ever more so than a histerical ass clown.
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Omen, Dude Your a ****ing wild man.... mad props:head:.....are you prior service? If even 15% of americans took self defense seriously i truely believe violent crimes would decline. You are not only defending yourself but others around you. You dont even have to physically act in a situation, by keeping your cool and understanding the situation you can help the police or who ever more so than a histerical ass clown.
Haha thanks!

No, I tried to get in the Military, not gonna work for now(security clearance issues), considering the Police academy.

I'm 21, so maybe after a few years, I'll try again.

I agree with the above too, most people freak out like a f**king chimpanzee on crack..... when I call 911, more than once they thought I was kidding because I'm calm and just give facts instead of OMG every 2 seconds.
 
jon671

jon671

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
Completely against it. I got robbed by ****ing gang bangers (bloods). Took one down and started pounding after that the other three jumped me. Most people who would vote for it live sheltered lives. Oh yeah the only one they caught was the driver and he might get off. When I went to the police station to identify him they didn't do a fuc*ing line up. So I am supposed to trust pigs with my life. Fu*k that. The only reason I didn't bust those fu*ks was certain things are "unlicensed" :lol:
 
whiskers

whiskers

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Would the d0uche bags that voted "support" like to explain themselves???

SomeWhatGifted, I'm VERY disappointed in you
 

Urban Monk

Board Sponsor
Awards
1
  • Established
I'm down for biometrically labeled guns.

Guns that can only be operated by their legal owners/purchasers.
 
whiskers

whiskers

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
I'm down for biometrically labeled guns.

Guns that can only be operated by their legal owners/purchasers.
Wouldnt that raise the cost BIGTIME making them unaffordable for many people?
(I dont know, I'm just guessing)
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
I'm down for biometrically labeled guns.

Guns that can only be operated by their legal owners/purchasers.
What if you're wearing gloves?

What if it's your wife's gun and your wife just got shot in the head?

What if your hands are dirty(oil, food, etc...) and you need to use the gun but it can't identify you?

What if you can take a gun from one attacker, thinking you can defend yourself against the others, but nothing happens? And this is not unlikely to happen, within arms reach, I can disarm anyone of their firearm and place two rounds in them with their own firearm in less than 2 seconds.

Stupid idea.
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Wouldnt that raise the cost BIGTIME making them unaffordable for many people?
(I dont know, I'm just guessing)
I'm pretty sure guns with biometric safeties don't exist yet. :lol:
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Wouldnt that raise the cost BIGTIME making them unaffordable for many people?
(I dont know, I'm just guessing)
That's what the people who are too scared, too irresponsible, too cowardly to own/carry/use one, they think just because they can't then, everyone else can't either....:rolleyes:
 
somewhatgifted

somewhatgifted

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Would the d0uche bags that voted "support" like to explain themselves???

SomeWhatGifted, I'm VERY disappointed in you
Im not american and guns are already illegal here (except hunting) doesnt seem that bad to me. After votingin the poll im thinkin i may have to pick up a gun in case my tin foil hat doesnt work and i need to shoot infedels, lol. But seriously it would be nice to have a gun "if needed" hope i never need one. If anything i try to advocate for rights and not taking them, so my bad.
 
jon671

jon671

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
I'm down for biometrically labeled guns.

Guns that can only be operated by their legal owners/purchasers.
It would raise the cost greatly, but if they did do it the gun should only take bullets that can be traced back to the biometrically labeled gun. But I'm sure people would figure out ways around this. Sick ways you know?
 
jon671

jon671

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
What if you're wearing gloves?

What if it's your wife's gun and your wife just got shot in the head?

What if your hands are dirty(oil, food, etc...) and you need to use the gun but it can't identify you?

What if you can take a gun from one attacker, thinking you can defend yourself against the others, but nothing happens? And this is not unlikely to happen, within arms reach, I can disarm anyone of their firearm and place two rounds in them with their own firearm in less than 2 seconds.

Stupid idea.
Also could you imagine being framed?

I could picture someone in jail for life, because someone framed them

using their cum rag or some sh*t.
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Yeah, if I want to use your gun and you got a biometric ID system, after I knock you down and stab your eyes or slit your throat with my knife, I'm cutting your finger off, slicing a thick piece of skin and taping it to the ID part and use YOUR gun, to commit more crimes.

Nice idea though.
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Also could you imagine being framed?

I could picture someone in jail for life, because someone framed them

using their cum rag or some sh*t.
Yeah no ****, after I use your gun to commit a crime, wipe my prints off, smear your prints on, get away and get rid of your body.

You're the prime suspect and assumed a fugitive because you can't be found.......great idea though.
 

Similar threads


Top