Assault Weapons Ban 2008 bill

[pantherdude63]

Haha I think that the world definately owes the U.S. for both world wars but especially the 2nd, there's really no denying it.
If we werent "gun crazy" I think our military would definately suffer as well. Growing up around guns just makes you value them more and if more people were brought up this way I think most peoples opinions of them would change. A gun cant just walk off and kill someone, it takes a human being to pull the trigger. Are we going to outlaw knives now too? Besides, if a bad guy wants one bad enough, he'll find a gun.

 

[dsade]

Haha I think that the world definately owes the U.S. for both world wars but especially the 2nd, there's really no denying it.
If we werent "gun crazy" I think our military would definately suffer as well. Growing up around guns just makes you value them more and if more people were brought up this way I think most peoples opinions of them would change. A gun cant just walk off and kill someone, it takes a human being to pull the trigger. Are we going to outlaw knives now too? Besides, if a bad guy wants one bad enough, he'll find a gun.

Have you ever seen the horrors of someone's head smashed in with a rock?

When will we outlaw these horrendous killing implements?

 

[jamesb2525]

I oppose it
1. Because anytime you ban something like this from people, you are only taking it away from the law abiding citizens. The argument is that if the law abiding citizens have guns and get robed that is how the bad people obtain their guns well a little reality check we have thousands of illegal aliens cross are borders everyday from Mexico you don’t think the bad people couldn’t smuggle in guns like they do drugs. Then you’re worse off because the criminals know that the law abiding citizens can’t protect themselves.

2. If they take away the 2nd amendment how could you possibly stop the government from taking away all of your rights if they want to

Don’t forget we are a free country today because of minute men (citizens with guns)
I cant remember who exactly it was but someone high up in the Japanese military said he would never attack on American soil because their would be a gun behind every blade of grass.

What makes something an assault rifle I am a owner of an ar-15 and handguns with 16rd clips and I use them for target shooting and protection. If you wanted to kill someone you could do it with any gun or knife or even a pen so should I not be aloud to have a pen or a baseball bat, gulf club, car ex
…..Ha ha ha im probably a rambling idiot but this topic gets me fired up.

 

[pantherdude63]

I pro gun all the way. It would be a huge mistake for them to mess with the 2nd amend. But I do think America's politicians have our best interest in mind.....NOT!lol

 

[pantherdude63]

Have you ever seen the horrors of someone's head smashed in with a rock?

When will we outlaw these horrendous killing implements?

With the way our legislature is, probably next year.lol

 

[EasyEJL]

u yanks are crazy - how is anyone gona respect u as a civilised country when you've all got heavy artillery in your houses... WRONG... VERY WRONG!!!

what keeps a country civilized better than knowing that the house you are about to try and rob might be armed?

 

[brk_nemesis]

you are talking about baring arms in times of war - this is about baring arms in domestic households, in a supposedly peaceful country... If Americans are living in a warzone then perhaps they do have the right to bare arms. - but i seriously doubt this is the case....

We have the right to bare arms to protect ourselves from internal dangers just as well as foreign. incase there is an internal or domestic conflict on American soil, militias could be created to build a homeland defense. If necessary, arms could be used to protect against those who dont respect the law, nor care about the consequences for their actions.

U talk about a right to bare arms but don't people have more of a right not to get their heads blown off by people exercising their right to bare arms? That seems to be a much more important right to me and the country where i live...

Really? So you believe that its okay to get mugged in your country by a man with a knife, with no way to defend yourself?
I guess you'll just say " oh well , being stabbed isnt that bad, at least I didnt get shot." Last i checked ppl in this country dont randomly go around shooting people, simply b/c they own a gun; its criminals, usually with previous records, who CANNOT legally own a gun, who obtained the firearm ILLEGALLY.

And thanks for the history lesson :nono: and ye u did remove our asses from ur country after the war of independance but right after we DISCOVERED YOUR ASSES!

oh okay,...... Im sure it was only the english. Not columbus, not the vikings, spanish, or french. Im sure none of these mentioned had any influences on discovering the Americas,... it was only the english. oh please.

and ye u did make a very belated and brief appearance in the 2 world wars but only when American interests were threatened... but thanks for that anyway

World War1,... it was Great Britian who declared war on Germany, not the other way around. Germany attacked Belgium and due to treaties/alliances YOU entered the war, hence it was your problem, not ours, you were not attacked. yet before 1917, before the U.S. entered the war, despite the "unrestricted" submarine warefare, we risked boats just to supply your country.

As far as World war 2, we landed in england in jan. of 42' and war in europe ended in may of 45',... I wouldn't call this a "brief" appearance. And also considering we once again shuttled supplies to England before Pearl Harbor, and also gave you American pilots to also fight the air war before we declared war on Germany... I woundnt say our involvement was "belated" at all, it was a smart decision to try to save lives, unlike YOUR decision to jump into WW1 unprevoked, based on nothing but a Belgium neutrality act, only for us to come and pull you out.

higher crime rate eh?? i dont think so.. esp when it scomes to gun crime - i think u will find its A LOT lower than yours...

Sorry Sir, but YOU are incorrect. Just because a country has guns doesnt make its crime rate "top" of the charts. Total crime statistics are based on "Per Capita", and based on per 1,000 people, the UK has a 85.5517,... the U.S. is only 80.0645% and we HAVE guns.
Just goes to show you, you dont need guns to commit a crime.

stats taken from Invalid Link Removed

anyway... i do love Americans even if u r gun crazy - u have great bodybuilding supplements and forums :thumbsup:

well good, so do we. But please refrain from making comments on subjects you dont understand. You are not American nor were you born here. So you do not have a patriotic belief for the right to bare arms and in so doing, to defend themselves from danger if necessary. In the UK you do not have this right, and so therefore you interpretation of this right is therefore void.

And as far as the "civilized country" comment goes,.....haha thats funny coming from the english, the one country whose Kings and monarches gave out unlimited amounts of bloodshed for centuries throughout the land, for nothing more than "power." Yeah thats civilized.

 

[bioman]

There's usually a bill like this out there, most never make it past the House. I oppose it and also think it would be political suicide for Obama to sign it should it make it through the House and Senate. He made a lot of headway with moderates during his campaign and to attack the 2nd amendment now...when there are CLEARLY bigger fish to fry..would be a slap in the face.

My bet is on this losing momentum before it ever gets started.

 

[chasec]

wow; lots of ignorance in this thread. for all you talking about NFA items go check out the BATF website for clarification (suppressors, full auto weapons, SBR's, etc.)

for those of you who support this ban i ask you this question; should our government legislate what is considered necessary to us?
Is a semi automatic rifle with a collapsible stock and a pistol grip necessary? probably not, but i own several. just because you see no reason to possess one of these items doesn't mean i have to agree with you.

lets use an example a bit closer to your hearts now. what happens when CODEX comes up for a vote. i would wager a vast majority of the public see no "need" to posses some of these supplements. in my mind that doesn't give the government the right to tell me i can't have them though.

i'll leave you with a poem

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

 

[LilPsychotic]

The solution is NOT banning guns. The solution is to increase the severity of the punishment for misusing guns, and other serious crimes, or mabye even not so serious crimes. I think the death penalty should be used for a 3 strikes and your out type of scenario. And not this wait on death row for 20 years stuff, I mean death immediately following a guilty verdict by a jury of peers. This country needs more people who think like me in order to survive.

 

[soseg]

cbf reading all the posts here... but i just dont see the need for guns... america is like the only country in the world (western/civilised at least) that is so gun crazy... and its at a point of no return now cause theres something like 2.5 guns per person in the states... that people wont allow anyone to take it away coz theres so many floating around how are u going to protect urself?

in my opinion its the bigglest flaw of the states which i guess started with (i think?) the 2nd amendment...

just my opinion and dont mean to offend anyone... i spent 4 months in the states and loved it, wonderful country... but just in comparison to all other similar countries out there... none of which have the gun issue... "guns to protect" etc... you gotta admit theres a lot lot less shootings/murders

 

[LilPsychotic]

Well your argument is flawed from start to finish. The ones purpetrating the crimes are the criminals, not the law abiding citizens. Take the guns away from the citizens, and you have an army of wrong doers who are armed to the teeth with no deterent to commit crimes and acts of violence. A ban does not take the guns away from the criminals. I can probrably go to any street corner in the various ghettos near where I live and purchase an illegal arm for under $200, which is not very much money. Yes, some of these guns may be stolen from law abiding citizens, but by in large the are brought in from black market arms dealers from south america. This bill is an example of creeping incrementalism. One may think "well who needs an AK anyways? They should be banned". Once the bill is passed, we have given the government the string. The string that they can keep pulling tighter and tighter, until we end up like so many western European nations in which guns are banned completely. Bills like this that are passed under the facade of "safety" are simply a means of control. A measure of control that is designed to take power away from the people. It is not the government's right to do so. It is my right as an American to protect myself from dangerous criminals, and more importantly from an unjust government. That is the essense of the second amendment. It was not written for self defense purposes, it was written to enable the people with the needed power to overthrown a corrupt regime. That is why the left is threatened by it, and that is why they want gun ownership abolished in this conutry. And that is why we cannot let it happen.

 

[jamesb2525]

Well your argument is flawed from start to finish. The ones purpetrating the crimes are the criminals, not the law abiding citizens. Take the guns away from the citizens, and you have an army of wrong doers who are armed to the teeth with no deterent to commit crimes and acts of violence. A ban does not take the guns away from the criminals. I can probrably go to any street corner in the various ghettos near where I live and purchase an illegal arm for under $200, which is not very much money. Yes, some of these guns may be stolen from law abiding citizens, but by in large the are brought in from black market arms dealers from south america. This bill is an example of creeping incrementalism. One may think "well who needs an AK anyways? They should be banned". Once the bill is passed, we have given the government the string. The string that they can keep pulling tighter and tighter, until we end up like so many western European nations in which guns are banned completely. Bills like this that are passed under the facade of "safety" are simply a means of control. A measure of control that is designed to take power away from the people. It is not the government's right to do so. It is my right as an American to protect myself from dangerous criminals, and more importantly from an unjust government. That is the essense of the second amendment. It was not written for self defense purposes, it was written to enable the people with the needed power to overthrown a corrupt regime. That is why the left is threatened by it, and that is why they want gun ownership abolished in this conutry. And that is why we cannot let it happen.

:goodpost::thumbsup:

 

[samva777]

Why?

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

Why the hell would you be a democrat and not expect to lose your gun rights. :think:

 

[samva777]

You are wrong about the militia

I'm a firearms instructor(getting that out of the way before my next statement)

I find no reason what-so-ever to own fully automatic weapons. Outside of being a collector but I really don't care if you're a collector. There are plenty of people out there that would love to collect things but can't because they're illegal. I find no modern day reasons to have fully auto weapons other than the argument of 'i want my guns'. While I don't find it a good argument I accept the fact that people feel strongly about it.

You're not stopping thieves/rapists/burglers any better with an ak47 than you can with any other semi-auto weapon that wouldn't be banned. The argument of protecting yourself from your government is bullshit. There's not a militia alive in the US today that can stand up to the military of their state/country. In the days it was written it made sense but today it doesn't.

I also believe that banning fully auto weapons isn't going to lead to some kind of reduction in crime either.

Here is why, normally when a dictatorship takes over the first thing they do is ban all private ownership of guns. The reason is you dont have to take on the local military to win the war as has been proven so many times in the past.

A good gorilla action taking out key areas and people , can win a war. Also and one of the most important, there are normally a few head people at the top of any dictatorship removing them by well aimed rifle fire I.E. can destabalize the entire dictatorship.

Please learn some historical facts as the past is always an indicator of the future. Julius Ceasar said If history has shown anything its that anyone can be asassinated.

Yes taking out 1 or 2 top leaders can win a war.The british in WW2 had a plan to asassinate Hitler but decided since Hitler was overriding his generals and actually helping the allies to win becuase of stupid desisions they decided not to try and kill him. The name of the Operation was called Operation Foxley for you history buffs out there.

Fast foward to this point in time some general and a handfull of officers along with some sympathetic politicians and some rich backers decide to take over usa. But wait all the civilians have been stripped of there guns. Just sheeps waiting to be slaughtered.

What you say this can never happen here in good old USA and will never be tried. Check out that link or google Marine General Smedly Butler

The founding fathers gave us the 2nd amendment becuase they were masters of human nature , they knew there would always be people who try to control nations of people. We dont answer to a king like are forfathers did and when the king tried to force the issue we beat them becuase we were armed. Only Free Men own Guns.

 

[brk_nemesis]

Here is why, normally when a dictatorship takes over the first thing they do is ban all private ownership of guns. The reason is you dont have to take on the local military to win the war as has been proven so many times in the past.

A good gorilla action taking out key areas and people , can win a war. Also and one of the most important, there are normally a few head people at the top of any dictatorship removing them by well aimed rifle fire I.E. can destabalize the entire dictatorship.

Please learn some historical facts as the past is always an indicator of the future. Julius Ceasar said If history has shown anything its that anyone can be asassinated.

Yes taking out 1 or 2 top leaders can win a war.The british in WW2 had a plan to asassinate Hitler but decided since Hitler was overriding his generals and actually helping the allies to win becuase of stupid desisions they decided not to try and kill him. The name of the Operation was called Operation Foxley for you history buffs out there.

Fast foward to this point in time some general and a handfull of officers along with some sympathetic politicians and some rich backers decide to take over usa. But wait all the civilians have been stripped of there guns. Just sheeps waiting to be slaughtered.

What you say this can never happen here in good old USA and will never be tried. Check out that link or google Marine General Smedly Butler

The founding fathers gave us the 2nd amendment becuase they were masters of human nature , they knew there would always be people who try to control nations of people. We dont answer to a king like are forfathers did and when the king tried to force the issue we beat them becuase we were armed. Only Free Men own Guns.

I agree with you,.. but also add in that one of the biggest reasons why Operation Foxley was canceled was the fact that by assassinating Hitler, Great Britain was afraid of a "martyr" situation and therefore resulting in screwing up any chances for future ceasefire/treaty/surrender with Germany. Everything else i can pretty much agree, but I do respect Jay's point of view on not needing full autos and many other firearms. No I dont need a Barrett M82 or a class 3 uzi,....... but at the same time I dont need a ferrari, a corvette, or Escalade'. I guess b/c a 4 banger will get me from point A to point B, we'll just ban the other higher priced, higher proformance cars b/c we "really" dont need them. Hell we ARE on a supplemental/BB'ing forum,... i guess b/c food is good enough to get us all by,.. lets just ban supplements,... we "really" dont need them for our bodies to work. See what I am saying,..... the principle of "not needing" applies just about everything. Difference is, this is America,.... and we have the right to make that choice,.... while many others dont. Without these rights of choice,... we are no different then some dam dictatorship or communist state.

I think we should have the right to own fully autos, and collector forms if we want,.. i mean honestly if a guy wants to spent $8,000-$10,000 on a registered MP5 sear,.. by all means go for if you got the $$$, although i have to say i have much better things to spend my $$ on.. But then again these types of ppl/collectors are gonna have these kinds of firearms put up. I havent heard of a situation yet where a burglar broke into a class3 dealer's house and get shot down my mac 10.

 

[dsade]

I havent heard of a situation yet where a burglar broke into a class3 dealer's house and get shot down my mac 10.

Maybe because no self-respecting collector would have such trash as a mac-10?

 

[Omen]

Maybe because no self-respecting collector would have such trash as a mac-10?

:lol: You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to dsade again.

The Mac-10 has it's uses, like a 2" .357magnum, at 10' it's excellent, 30 rounds of 230 grain .45 JHP is something even I wouldn't wanna get shot with

In someone's face, that would be the fastest plastic surgery you can think of other than a 1/4lb block of C-4 :lol:

However, the MP5 is far superior for a "tactical" option, I've fired the MP5 full auto, muzzle rise was very controllable, in fact, I didn't miss a single shot from the body and was able to move it up to the head while shooting the neck (target).

The Mp5 is an excellent SMG, I love it.

 

[Omen]

Here is why, normally when a dictatorship takes over the first thing they do is ban all private ownership of guns. The reason is you dont have to take on the local military to win the war as has been proven so many times in the past.

A good gorilla action taking out key areas and people , can win a war. Also and one of the most important, there are normally a few head people at the top of any dictatorship removing them by well aimed rifle fire I.E. can destabalize the entire dictatorship.

Please learn some historical facts as the past is always an indicator of the future. Julius Ceasar said If history has shown anything its that anyone can be asassinated.

Yes taking out 1 or 2 top leaders can win a war.The british in WW2 had a plan to asassinate Hitler but decided since Hitler was overriding his generals and actually helping the allies to win becuase of stupid desisions they decided not to try and kill him. The name of the Operation was called Operation Foxley for you history buffs out there.

Fast foward to this point in time some general and a handfull of officers along with some sympathetic politicians and some rich backers decide to take over usa. But wait all the civilians have been stripped of there guns. Just sheeps waiting to be slaughtered.

What you say this can never happen here in good old USA and will never be tried. Check out that link or google Marine General Smedly Butler

The founding fathers gave us the 2nd amendment becuase they were masters of human nature , they knew there would always be people who try to control nations of people. We dont answer to a king like are forfathers did and when the king tried to force the issue we beat them becuase we were armed. Only Free Men own Guns.

Invalid Link Removed

The government is not some benevolent entity, anywhere, it's just a bunch of people that work for us to organize sh*t, just like organizers for a party, OUR public SERVANTS.

Sometimes, when they overstep their boundaries they need to be punished to remind them who they are and what they're paid to do just like any servant.

WE will ALWAYS be LARGER in numbers and more powerful than ANY standing government, there is nothing unPatriotic or wrong about punishing those responsible for messing with our assets that we trust them with or even worse, OUR SERVANTS trying to dictate OUR lives :lol:

They are slowly, but surely, pushing their luck and their security.

 

[Omen]

Oppose:

EESCHMan, Emerge, hulkrager, Iceman1800, K1212, malou, Nightwanderer, rippedforce63, somewhatgifted, soseg, suncloud, TripDog, workout8485

Just wondering, other than Somewhatgifted and soseg(Russian and something else), how many of you are American?

 

[brk_nemesis]

Maybe because no self-respecting collector would have such trash as a mac-10?

hahahahaha nice one. And once again I agree with you.....haha, i only chose it as it sounded quite catchy in the last line of the post. guess i could have chose an AUG HBAR or mg42,... or something fancier for an example,..... pardon me, lol.:lol:

 

[xtraflossy]

I have made this point countless times here but no one listens sadly

Although I would hate to see a well regulated militia defend my state with a bunch of handguns.