Shooting in Conn. School
- Thread starter UncleBob
- Start date
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
I love it when the anti-gun crowd brings up rocket launchers. It's an old classic.
I'll bite.
If the citizens elect and push legislators to allow a method for citizens to legally purchase rocket launchers then damn straight - they should be legal. If that's what the citizens want, then that's what they get.
Since the second amendment was obviously meant to be a power check for tyranny, you do have to let citizens have a certain portion of firepower that the government has. It's a sliding scale that must be defined by the people.
For example, if we were only allowed to have muskets in the modern warfare age then the purpose of the second amendment would be lost. Conversely, it's probably not a good idea to let just anyone build fuel-air bombs, phosphorus grenades, and nukes as well.
Most people into this stuff feel like the assault rifle thing is the modern "line" that should not be crossed. Having lots of citizens with assault rifles (that are responsible for very few murders, remember) is widely acknowledged as a reasonable balance of power against tyranny.
There will be some smart ass here that will inevitably say "har har! What's an AR-15 going to do against a tank or a jet with laser guided bombs! Har har!" So lets nip that in the bud right now - the answer is nothing. But that isn't the point. The point is a populace armed with assault rifles will still be very difficult to subjugate with any modern tech - unless the goal is to just exterminate (which is highly unlikely).
I'll bite.
If the citizens elect and push legislators to allow a method for citizens to legally purchase rocket launchers then damn straight - they should be legal. If that's what the citizens want, then that's what they get.
Since the second amendment was obviously meant to be a power check for tyranny, you do have to let citizens have a certain portion of firepower that the government has. It's a sliding scale that must be defined by the people.
For example, if we were only allowed to have muskets in the modern warfare age then the purpose of the second amendment would be lost. Conversely, it's probably not a good idea to let just anyone build fuel-air bombs, phosphorus grenades, and nukes as well.
Most people into this stuff feel like the assault rifle thing is the modern "line" that should not be crossed. Having lots of citizens with assault rifles (that are responsible for very few murders, remember) is widely acknowledged as a reasonable balance of power against tyranny.
There will be some smart ass here that will inevitably say "har har! What's an AR-15 going to do against a tank or a jet with laser guided bombs! Har har!" So lets nip that in the bud right now - the answer is nothing. But that isn't the point. The point is a populace armed with assault rifles will still be very difficult to subjugate with any modern tech - unless the goal is to just exterminate (which is highly unlikely).
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
An interactive map that is growing daily, tracking the rapes, assaults, murders, and robberies that were stopped by armed citizens.
It's important data to keep in mind when having this debate, so you aren't brainwashed into thinking these evil chunks of metal just kill innocent people all the time.
It's important data to keep in mind when having this debate, so you aren't brainwashed into thinking these evil chunks of metal just kill innocent people all the time.
[quote name='thrustbucket']An interactive map that is growing daily, tracking the rapes, assaults, murders, and robberies that were stopped by armed citizens.
It's important data to keep in mind when having this debate, so you aren't brainwashed into thinking these evil chunks of metal just kill innocent people all the time.[/QUOTE]
Sadly, there are too may folks who wholly believe that rapist, murderers and robbers are nothing more than innocent people, victims of circumstance and society, with no will of their own and no other options except to rape, murder and rob.
It's important data to keep in mind when having this debate, so you aren't brainwashed into thinking these evil chunks of metal just kill innocent people all the time.[/QUOTE]
Sadly, there are too may folks who wholly believe that rapist, murderers and robbers are nothing more than innocent people, victims of circumstance and society, with no will of their own and no other options except to rape, murder and rob.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='thrustbucket']The point is a populace armed with assault rifles will still be very difficult to subjugate.[/QUOTE]
disagree.
disagree.
Yeah, too many people forget the protection a gun offers a lot of people. They post their anecdotes and say "Look this guy accidentally shot his family member", or try to belittle gun owners by making fun of them, but there is no doubt there are a lot of cases where lives, and property have been saved because of owning a gun, a lot of them aren't even reported.
While killing someone with a gun is a lot easier than stabbing someone, I wonder how many people will have the stomach to defend themselves with a knife when the intruder comes with a knife, or gun.
I guess they should just call a gun, I mean the police. They will save the day.
While killing someone with a gun is a lot easier than stabbing someone, I wonder how many people will have the stomach to defend themselves with a knife when the intruder comes with a knife, or gun.
I guess they should just call a gun, I mean the police. They will save the day.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...guard-used-an-ar-15-to-fend-off-armed-holdup/
Read some of the comments though....
"
According to the FBI, in 2011 (last year for which stats are currently available) there were 12,664 murders in the US 8583 (51.506%) were by firearms of those by firearm a mere 323 (2.551% of all murders) were by a rifle, all types.
Now if you want the percentage of people murdered by firearms who were killed by “rifle, all types” it’s 3.763%, but knives still killed far more people (1694 or 13.338% of all murders).
Interestingly according to NITSA 32,367 people died in car accidents, and 9878 of them were related to drunk driving.
So you’re 2.556 times more likely to die in a car than to me murdered, 3.771 times more likely to die in a car than to be murdered by a gun, and 100.207 times more likely to die in a car than to be killed by a rifle. All while being 1.151 times more likely to die in a drunk driving incident than to be murdered by any firearm.
Repost as you like. Sources are the FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2011 and NITSA websites."
"He hates any statistics showing that blacks make up 12.5% of the population but commit 1/2 of the nation’s murders. He does not like people knowing that if we drop black murder rates to the same as whites, then the national murder rate would drop by almost 40%, making us as safe as the majority of his loved European nations.
This story will really miff him, being law abiding blacks were able to prevent murder with the use of a rifle.
He hates being asked if dems and the MSM would like to see less black people murdered, being they were 50% of the nation’s murder victims last year."
"According to the police chief in Emmeryville, CA the security guard acted offensively, not defensively, and should therefore be prosecuted. Liberal t**d!"
Read some of the comments though....
"
According to the FBI, in 2011 (last year for which stats are currently available) there were 12,664 murders in the US 8583 (51.506%) were by firearms of those by firearm a mere 323 (2.551% of all murders) were by a rifle, all types.
Now if you want the percentage of people murdered by firearms who were killed by “rifle, all types” it’s 3.763%, but knives still killed far more people (1694 or 13.338% of all murders).
Interestingly according to NITSA 32,367 people died in car accidents, and 9878 of them were related to drunk driving.
So you’re 2.556 times more likely to die in a car than to me murdered, 3.771 times more likely to die in a car than to be murdered by a gun, and 100.207 times more likely to die in a car than to be killed by a rifle. All while being 1.151 times more likely to die in a drunk driving incident than to be murdered by any firearm.
Repost as you like. Sources are the FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2011 and NITSA websites."
"He hates any statistics showing that blacks make up 12.5% of the population but commit 1/2 of the nation’s murders. He does not like people knowing that if we drop black murder rates to the same as whites, then the national murder rate would drop by almost 40%, making us as safe as the majority of his loved European nations.
This story will really miff him, being law abiding blacks were able to prevent murder with the use of a rifle.
He hates being asked if dems and the MSM would like to see less black people murdered, being they were 50% of the nation’s murder victims last year."
"According to the police chief in Emmeryville, CA the security guard acted offensively, not defensively, and should therefore be prosecuted. Liberal t**d!"
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
derp derp derp. the comments on the blaze are straight outta crazytown. Do me a favor, if you think this is really amazing stuff, and check the FBI data on homicides in 2011. Go figure out what percentage of those 12,664 murders were due to firearms. You don't have to come back and report to me, I already looked. I just want you to find out for yourself - it can be our secret.
I'll even make it easy for you: Expanded Homicide Data Table 8. Google and go, my friend, on a silver platter.
As for race and homicide, that's far more complex an issue than that comment makes it out to be. Improving economic viability of black communities, improving employment rates of blacks in those communities, keeping families whole in those neighborhoods, restoring the community damage done through the hyper-incarceration policies of the last 40 years - that's a good start to repairing the damage poor, black, imporverished communities have experienced. Offer a man a good paying job and he'll put down his job. He'll serve as an example to stay in school to his children, so they won't become fatally cynical towards their life chances at an early age. Changing the inner city involves effort from *EVERYONE* - you and me and her and him and their kids and their parents. The fact that you're reading this, shaking your head, thinking that it's not your fault violent crime rates are what they are in the inner-city today, well, that's why it's going to continue. It's not your fault, correct, but your unwillingness to recognize systemic issues that continue to damage those communities, and the potential we all have to help it, is why it will continue.
which, semi-related (reminded by some of the comments); why are y'all worshipping at the altar of Ben Carson? His ideas are pretty quality for a discussion of, say, taxation while sitting at the dinner table; but on a national stage they are neither new, nor profound, nor accurate. Also, tell your handlers to stop pointing out that he's a neurologist - it doesn't immediately qualify him as a master of economics issues, and it looks pandering (ZOMG GUYS THE BLACK GUY IS A DOCTOR! doesn't speak well to the kinds of expectations the right has for nonwhites).
I'll even make it easy for you: Expanded Homicide Data Table 8. Google and go, my friend, on a silver platter.
As for race and homicide, that's far more complex an issue than that comment makes it out to be. Improving economic viability of black communities, improving employment rates of blacks in those communities, keeping families whole in those neighborhoods, restoring the community damage done through the hyper-incarceration policies of the last 40 years - that's a good start to repairing the damage poor, black, imporverished communities have experienced. Offer a man a good paying job and he'll put down his job. He'll serve as an example to stay in school to his children, so they won't become fatally cynical towards their life chances at an early age. Changing the inner city involves effort from *EVERYONE* - you and me and her and him and their kids and their parents. The fact that you're reading this, shaking your head, thinking that it's not your fault violent crime rates are what they are in the inner-city today, well, that's why it's going to continue. It's not your fault, correct, but your unwillingness to recognize systemic issues that continue to damage those communities, and the potential we all have to help it, is why it will continue.
which, semi-related (reminded by some of the comments); why are y'all worshipping at the altar of Ben Carson? His ideas are pretty quality for a discussion of, say, taxation while sitting at the dinner table; but on a national stage they are neither new, nor profound, nor accurate. Also, tell your handlers to stop pointing out that he's a neurologist - it doesn't immediately qualify him as a master of economics issues, and it looks pandering (ZOMG GUYS THE BLACK GUY IS A DOCTOR! doesn't speak well to the kinds of expectations the right has for nonwhites).
[quote name='mykevermin']derp derp derp. the comments on the blaze are straight outta crazytown. Do me a favor, if you think this is really amazing stuff, and check the FBI data on homicides in 2011. Go figure out what percentage of those 12,664 murders were due to firearms. You don't have to come back and report to me, I already looked. I just want you to find out for yourself - it can be our secret.
I'll even make it easy for you: Expanded Homicide Data Table 8. Google and go, my friend, on a silver platter.
As for race and homicide, that's far more complex an issue than that comment makes it out to be. Improving economic viability of black communities, improving employment rates of blacks in those communities, keeping families whole in those neighborhoods, restoring the community damage done through the hyper-incarceration policies of the last 40 years - that's a good start to repairing the damage poor, black, imporverished communities have experienced. Offer a man a good paying job and he'll put down his job. He'll serve as an example to stay in school to his children, so they won't become fatally cynical towards their life chances at an early age. Changing the inner city involves effort from *EVERYONE* - you and me and her and him and their kids and their parents. The fact that you're reading this, shaking your head, thinking that it's not your fault violent crime rates are what they are in the inner-city today, well, that's why it's going to continue. It's not your fault, correct, but your unwillingness to recognize systemic issues that continue to damage those communities, and the potential we all have to help it, is why it will continue.
which, semi-related (reminded by some of the comments); why are y'all worshipping at the altar of Ben Carson? His ideas are pretty quality for a discussion of, say, taxation while sitting at the dinner table; but on a national stage they are neither new, nor profound, nor accurate. Also, tell your handlers to stop pointing out that he's a neurologist - it doesn't immediately qualify him as a master of economics issues, and it looks pandering (ZOMG GUYS THE BLACK GUY IS A DOCTOR! doesn't speak well to the kinds of expectations the right has for nonwhites).[/QUOTE]
The "really amazing stuff" to me here, myke, is that the dude saved lives and property by using his Constitutionally granted right.
As far as the other liberal swill that you posted, I will never accept the belief that a person can be excused for their conduct and poor choices due to atrocities enacted on previous generations. The right choice exists no matter how bad your current situation is. People have to decide for themselves to do right or wrong.
As for Dr. Carson, I liked what he said mostly, but it is too broad and non specific to truly be thought of as helpful. More rhetoric with no details, the same problem Romney had with his platform on tax reform and gov't savings.
I consider a lot of the posts here, as well as every political forum, as coming from "crazytown."
I'll even make it easy for you: Expanded Homicide Data Table 8. Google and go, my friend, on a silver platter.
As for race and homicide, that's far more complex an issue than that comment makes it out to be. Improving economic viability of black communities, improving employment rates of blacks in those communities, keeping families whole in those neighborhoods, restoring the community damage done through the hyper-incarceration policies of the last 40 years - that's a good start to repairing the damage poor, black, imporverished communities have experienced. Offer a man a good paying job and he'll put down his job. He'll serve as an example to stay in school to his children, so they won't become fatally cynical towards their life chances at an early age. Changing the inner city involves effort from *EVERYONE* - you and me and her and him and their kids and their parents. The fact that you're reading this, shaking your head, thinking that it's not your fault violent crime rates are what they are in the inner-city today, well, that's why it's going to continue. It's not your fault, correct, but your unwillingness to recognize systemic issues that continue to damage those communities, and the potential we all have to help it, is why it will continue.
which, semi-related (reminded by some of the comments); why are y'all worshipping at the altar of Ben Carson? His ideas are pretty quality for a discussion of, say, taxation while sitting at the dinner table; but on a national stage they are neither new, nor profound, nor accurate. Also, tell your handlers to stop pointing out that he's a neurologist - it doesn't immediately qualify him as a master of economics issues, and it looks pandering (ZOMG GUYS THE BLACK GUY IS A DOCTOR! doesn't speak well to the kinds of expectations the right has for nonwhites).[/QUOTE]
The "really amazing stuff" to me here, myke, is that the dude saved lives and property by using his Constitutionally granted right.
As far as the other liberal swill that you posted, I will never accept the belief that a person can be excused for their conduct and poor choices due to atrocities enacted on previous generations. The right choice exists no matter how bad your current situation is. People have to decide for themselves to do right or wrong.
As for Dr. Carson, I liked what he said mostly, but it is too broad and non specific to truly be thought of as helpful. More rhetoric with no details, the same problem Romney had with his platform on tax reform and gov't savings.
I consider a lot of the posts here, as well as every political forum, as coming from "crazytown."
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='egofed']I will never accept the belief[/QUOTE]
you don't say.
also, you completely miss the point, as evidenced by you thinking anyone is "excusing" anything. derp.
EDIT: Stryker? The vehicle, the porn actor, the professional wrestler? Help me out here.
you don't say.
also, you completely miss the point, as evidenced by you thinking anyone is "excusing" anything. derp.
EDIT: Stryker? The vehicle, the porn actor, the professional wrestler? Help me out here.
Funny how you ignore the statistics and go straight for the crazy people making the comments.
So why are you against assault weapons again mykevermin?
You just simply don't think people need them and they shouldn't be allowed to have them?
You don't have any logical argument, you are just irrationally scared of them. Legislation by fear, always a good thing right?
Oh well too bad what you think doesn't matter. You have nothing to back up gun control legislation besides "look at how many people die!!!11!!!"
So why are you against assault weapons again mykevermin?
You just simply don't think people need them and they shouldn't be allowed to have them?
You don't have any logical argument, you are just irrationally scared of them. Legislation by fear, always a good thing right?
Oh well too bad what you think doesn't matter. You have nothing to back up gun control legislation besides "look at how many people die!!!11!!!"
[quote name='mykevermin']you don't say.
also, you completely miss the point, as evidenced by you thinking anyone is "excusing" anything. derp.
EDIT: Stryker? The vehicle, the porn actor, the professional wrestler? Help me out here.[/QUOTE]
All of the above but especially the Stryker family of vehicles.
also, you completely miss the point, as evidenced by you thinking anyone is "excusing" anything. derp.
EDIT: Stryker? The vehicle, the porn actor, the professional wrestler? Help me out here.[/QUOTE]
All of the above but especially the Stryker family of vehicles.
[quote name='dohdough']This is exactly why I don't want and will never have a facebook account. I know that some of my friends and family have some pretty abhorrently racist views that peep out once in a while, so I'd rather not have it all up in my face(book).[/QUOTE]
Case in point (and this isn't even facebook...) found out a friend of mine is one of those dumbasses who think an AR15 is an acceptable weapon for home defense. His reasoning, they're easier to fire than a shotgun, and have less kick. Of course I've fired an AR15 another friend owns, and the thing jammed a few times that day, and it had a good kick to it as well. So yeah, things you'd rather not know about people.
Case in point (and this isn't even facebook...) found out a friend of mine is one of those dumbasses who think an AR15 is an acceptable weapon for home defense. His reasoning, they're easier to fire than a shotgun, and have less kick. Of course I've fired an AR15 another friend owns, and the thing jammed a few times that day, and it had a good kick to it as well. So yeah, things you'd rather not know about people.
[quote name='Clak']Case in point (and this isn't even facebook...) found out a friend of mine is one of those dumbasses who think an AR15 is an acceptable weapon for home defense. His reasoning, they're easier to fire than a shotgun, and have less kick. Of course I've fired an AR15 another friend owns, and the thing jammed a few times that day, and it had a good kick to it as well. So yeah, things you'd rather not know about people.[/QUOTE]
How presumptive and elitist do you have to be to call someone, a friend no less, a "dumbass" because of their preferred choice of weapon owned to protect their family? How delightfully tolerant you are of others' opinions....
Its weird to question someone exercising their Constitutional right in the privacy of their own home, yet not question the corruption and abuse of the use of taxpayer money spent on "entitlements". If a woman's choice to murder her baby is private and beyond gov't scrutiny, then so is a legal citizen's choice to own any firearm they choose. :lol:
How presumptive and elitist do you have to be to call someone, a friend no less, a "dumbass" because of their preferred choice of weapon owned to protect their family? How delightfully tolerant you are of others' opinions....
Its weird to question someone exercising their Constitutional right in the privacy of their own home, yet not question the corruption and abuse of the use of taxpayer money spent on "entitlements". If a woman's choice to murder her baby is private and beyond gov't scrutiny, then so is a legal citizen's choice to own any firearm they choose. :lol:[quote name='egofed']How presumptive and elitist do you have to be to call someone, a friend no less, a "dumbass" because of their preferred choice of weapon owned to protect their family? How delightfully tolerant you are of others' opinions.... Its weird to question someone exercising their Constitutional right in the privacy of their own home, yet not question the corruption and abuse of the use of taxpayer money spent on "entitlements". If a woman's choice to murder her baby is private and beyond gov't scrutiny, then so is a legal citizen's choice to own any firearm they choose. :lol:[/QUOTE]
In all fairness, his friend is a dumbass for letting him shoot a rifle that was in poor condition. FTFs and FTEs should have been worked out before it could taint the experience. That's really the last thing you want to do to give somebody a fair impression.
Its weird to question someone exercising their Constitutional right in the privacy of their own home, yet not question the corruption and abuse of the use of taxpayer money spent on "entitlements". If a woman's choice to murder her baby is private and beyond gov't scrutiny, then so is a legal citizen's choice to own any firearm they choose. :lol:[/QUOTE]In all fairness, his friend is a dumbass for letting him shoot a rifle that was in poor condition. FTFs and FTEs should have been worked out before it could taint the experience. That's really the last thing you want to do to give somebody a fair impression.
usickenme
CAGiversary!
How presumptive and elitist do you have to be to think that your willful ignorance and attempt to confuscate would actually work.
His friend is a dumbass because he reasoning is faulty... not "preferred choice of weapon". It's like saying. I prefer a Cooper Mini because I need a car with a lot of room.
His friend is a dumbass because he reasoning is faulty... not "preferred choice of weapon". It's like saying. I prefer a Cooper Mini because I need a car with a lot of room.
[quote name='Clak']I wish "some" of you would get it through your thick heads that not everything is about rights. I know that dumbasses have rights too, I just wish they'd be smarter about exercising them. I'm about to the point that I'm embarrassed to be a gun owner in this country.[/QUOTE]
LOL. You do realize you took Joe Biden's stance entirely, why get an AR when a good old double barrel shotgun is all you need. Some gun owner you are.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/20/us-usa-guns-biden-idUSBRE91J03720130220
LOL. You do realize you took Joe Biden's stance entirely, why get an AR when a good old double barrel shotgun is all you need. Some gun owner you are.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/20/us-usa-guns-biden-idUSBRE91J03720130220
[quote name='Clak']I wish "some" of you would get it through your thick heads that not everything is about rights. I know that dumbasses have rights too, I just wish they'd be smarter about exercising them. I'm about to the point that I'm embarrassed to be a gun owner in this country.[/QUOTE]
I am going to give you a chance to explain yourself here. What exactly is your friend doing wrong? Liking a weapon you are demonizing makes him a dumbass?
Give me 3 good fact based reasons why AR15's should be illegal.
"You don't need them", doesn't count as a good reason. We don't need a lot of things.
I am going to give you a chance to explain yourself here. What exactly is your friend doing wrong? Liking a weapon you are demonizing makes him a dumbass?
Give me 3 good fact based reasons why AR15's should be illegal.
"You don't need them", doesn't count as a good reason. We don't need a lot of things.
[quote name='Knoell']I am going to give you a chance to explain yourself here. What exactly is your friend doing wrong? Liking a weapon you are demonizing makes him a dumbass?
Give me 3 good fact based reasons why AR15's should be illegal.
"You don't need them", doesn't count as a good reason. We don't need a lot of things.[/QUOTE]
The 8 days of silence towards your question is comforting. Always drove me nuts that gun owners are consistently asked to justify their purchases while other purchases of 'excess' go unquestioned.
"You don't need them" seems to be what most people lean on.
Give me 3 good fact based reasons why AR15's should be illegal.
"You don't need them", doesn't count as a good reason. We don't need a lot of things.[/QUOTE]
The 8 days of silence towards your question is comforting. Always drove me nuts that gun owners are consistently asked to justify their purchases while other purchases of 'excess' go unquestioned.
"You don't need them" seems to be what most people lean on.
[quote name='KennyOO7']The 8 days of silence towards your question is comforting. Always drove me nuts that gun owners are consistently asked to justify their purchases while other purchases of 'excess' go unquestioned.
"You don't need them" seems to be what most people lean on.[/QUOTE]
One possible reason why there's "silence" is because the question is a strawman and out of context.
Clak's point wasn't about making AR-15's illegal, but that they're less than ideal for home defense for the same reason why you wouldn't use a sledge hammer to put a thumbtack into a cork board: you want to use the correct tools for the job. You could use a sledge hammer, but you're a lot better off using your thumb. I've made the same argument several times and some idiot was pulling the same schtick.
The versatility of the shotgun for using different types of shells as well as the the mechanics behind it make it more ideal for home defense than the average length semi-auto rifle and in some situations, even more than a handgun. You don't have to be as accurate and if you're using the correct load, you won't be sending projectiles into your neighbors houses. But hey, I don't know shit about guns so maybe you can explain why an AR-15 is better for home defense.
"You don't need them" seems to be what most people lean on.[/QUOTE]
One possible reason why there's "silence" is because the question is a strawman and out of context.
Clak's point wasn't about making AR-15's illegal, but that they're less than ideal for home defense for the same reason why you wouldn't use a sledge hammer to put a thumbtack into a cork board: you want to use the correct tools for the job. You could use a sledge hammer, but you're a lot better off using your thumb. I've made the same argument several times and some idiot was pulling the same schtick.
The versatility of the shotgun for using different types of shells as well as the the mechanics behind it make it more ideal for home defense than the average length semi-auto rifle and in some situations, even more than a handgun. You don't have to be as accurate and if you're using the correct load, you won't be sending projectiles into your neighbors houses. But hey, I don't know shit about guns so maybe you can explain why an AR-15 is better for home defense.
[quote name='dohdough']One possible reason why there's "silence" is because the question is a strawman and out of context.
Clak's point wasn't about making AR-15's illegal, but that they're less than ideal for home defense for the same reason why you wouldn't use a sledge hammer to put a thumbtack into a cork board: you want to use the correct tools for the job. You could use a sledge hammer, but you're a lot better off using your thumb. I've made the same argument several times and some idiot was pulling the same schtick.
The versatility of the shotgun for using different types of shells as well as the the mechanics behind it make it more ideal for home defense than the average length semi-auto rifle and in some situations, even more than a handgun. You don't have to be as accurate and if you're using the correct load, you won't be sending projectiles into your neighbors houses. But hey, I don't know shit about guns so maybe you can explain why an AR-15 is better for home defense.[/QUOTE]Wow, Joe Biden rears his ugly head again, just blast the girl scout through the door of your house with that shotgun to keep her from coming inside.
http://freebeacon.com/biden-just-fire-the-shotgun-through-the-door/
Your opinion that shotguns are better than an AR15 for home defense is just that and your ignorance shows. If you fire a slug, it will penetrate and over penetrate and end up probably more than a couple of feet from the end of your residence. If you dumb down the load to prevent over penetration you now have a less lethal load that may not save your life. Box of Truth has shown pretty much everything accepted for self defense is going to penetrate through 2 sheets of sheetrock. Anything that won't penetrate 2 sheets of sheetrock isn't really useful because skin is very thick and very effective at slowing bullets down as doctors lecturing on gunshot wounds have shown.
You bring up over penetration and I could punch through two sheets of sheetrock with an awl or screwdriver just by slamming it into the wall with my bare force alone. Get off your pedestool.
Clak's point wasn't about making AR-15's illegal, but that they're less than ideal for home defense for the same reason why you wouldn't use a sledge hammer to put a thumbtack into a cork board: you want to use the correct tools for the job. You could use a sledge hammer, but you're a lot better off using your thumb. I've made the same argument several times and some idiot was pulling the same schtick.
The versatility of the shotgun for using different types of shells as well as the the mechanics behind it make it more ideal for home defense than the average length semi-auto rifle and in some situations, even more than a handgun. You don't have to be as accurate and if you're using the correct load, you won't be sending projectiles into your neighbors houses. But hey, I don't know shit about guns so maybe you can explain why an AR-15 is better for home defense.[/QUOTE]Wow, Joe Biden rears his ugly head again, just blast the girl scout through the door of your house with that shotgun to keep her from coming inside.
http://freebeacon.com/biden-just-fire-the-shotgun-through-the-door/
Your opinion that shotguns are better than an AR15 for home defense is just that and your ignorance shows. If you fire a slug, it will penetrate and over penetrate and end up probably more than a couple of feet from the end of your residence. If you dumb down the load to prevent over penetration you now have a less lethal load that may not save your life. Box of Truth has shown pretty much everything accepted for self defense is going to penetrate through 2 sheets of sheetrock. Anything that won't penetrate 2 sheets of sheetrock isn't really useful because skin is very thick and very effective at slowing bullets down as doctors lecturing on gunshot wounds have shown.
You bring up over penetration and I could punch through two sheets of sheetrock with an awl or screwdriver just by slamming it into the wall with my bare force alone. Get off your pedestool.
The Crotch
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 15 (100%)
It's a little disingenuous to bring up slugs when they weren't mentioned. And unnecessary, given that buckshot penetrates much better than a lot of people give it credit for.
[quote name='The Crotch']It's a little disingenuous to bring up slugs when they weren't mentioned. And unnecessary, given that buckshot penetrates much better than a lot of people give it credit for.[/QUOTE]
It's not disingenuous, he wrote...
It's not disingenuous, he wrote...
A slug is loaded in a shell. 00 is loaded in a shell, birdshot in a shell. I took a slug because if you are outside of the effective range of your dumbed down birdshot and have a slug in hand ready to load because you're just peppering them and being completely ineffective because of distance/load, you will return to a shell that will over penetrate to stop the problem.
[quote name='Mad39er']Wow, Joe Biden rears his ugly head again, just blast the girl scout through the door of your house with that shotgun to keep her from coming inside.
http://freebeacon.com/biden-just-fire-the-shotgun-through-the-door/[/quote]
WTF? Where'd this come from? I'm more than a little curious as to why you used this particular imagery to make your point. Are the girl scouts hopped up on PCP in your neighborhood while pushing their death-by-sugar-in-a-box or something?
your neighbors right? If they didn't want to possibly have a stray bullet form their neighbor kill them, it's their own damn fault for not moving.
[quote name='Mad39er']It's not disingenuous, he wrote... A slug is loaded in a shell. 00 is loaded in a shell, birdshot in a shell. I took a slug because if you are outside of the effective range of your dumbed down birdshot and have a slug in hand ready to load because you're just peppering them and being completely ineffective because of distance/load, you will return to a shell that will over penetrate to stop the problem.[/QUOTE]
That's nice of you to quote me, but you kinda missed the point of the entire post. It's kinda like if I took your line about shooting girl scouts and used it as proof that you're a mentally disturbed person that is looking to put holes in them with an AR-15 because you like entry wounds from .223/.556 better than shotguns.
http://freebeacon.com/biden-just-fire-the-shotgun-through-the-door/[/quote]
WTF? Where'd this come from? I'm more than a little curious as to why you used this particular imagery to make your point. Are the girl scouts hopped up on PCP in your neighborhood while pushing their death-by-sugar-in-a-box or something?
Yeah,
your neighbors right? If they didn't want to possibly have a stray bullet form their neighbor kill them, it's their own damn fault for not moving.[quote name='Mad39er']It's not disingenuous, he wrote... A slug is loaded in a shell. 00 is loaded in a shell, birdshot in a shell. I took a slug because if you are outside of the effective range of your dumbed down birdshot and have a slug in hand ready to load because you're just peppering them and being completely ineffective because of distance/load, you will return to a shell that will over penetrate to stop the problem.[/QUOTE]
That's nice of you to quote me, but you kinda missed the point of the entire post. It's kinda like if I took your line about shooting girl scouts and used it as proof that you're a mentally disturbed person that is looking to put holes in them with an AR-15 because you like entry wounds from .223/.556 better than shotguns.
The Crotch
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 15 (100%)
[quote name='Mad39er']It's not disingenuous, he wrote... A slug is loaded in a shell. 00 is loaded in a shell, birdshot in a shell. I took a slug because if you are outside of the effective range of your dumbed down birdshot and have a slug in hand ready to load because you're just peppering them and being completely ineffective because of distance/load, you will return to a shell that will over penetrate to stop the problem.[/QUOTE]
I... what? What the?
I... what? What the
?[quote name='dohdough']WTF? Where'd this come from? I'm more than a little curious as to why you used this particular imagery to make your point. Are the girl scouts hopped up on PCP in your neighborhood while pushing their death-by-sugar-in-a-box or something?
Yeah, your neighbors right? If they didn't want to possibly have a stray bullet form their neighbor kill them, it's their own damn fault for not moving.
That's nice of you to quote me, but you kinda missed the point of the entire post. It's kinda like if I took your line about shooting girl scouts and used it as proof that you're a mentally disturbed person that is looking to put holes in them with an AR-15 because you like entry wounds from .223/.556 better than shotguns.[/QUOTE]Nice deflection, you really have the attention span of a goldfish and a profound inability to read into satire. You just play into Biden's unlawful, uneducated hands of shotgun ownership and that's shameful.
What's really shameful is that you're assuming that whomever is defending their home with an AR15 is going to shoot at EVERY exterior wall like a complete idiot. You'd absolutely be flapping at the gums if you were speaking. In a home defense situation, the defender is not blasting willy nilly because he's completely incompetent, just because you may empty your magazine and hit the reload button on the controller doesn't mean people want to reload a shotgun in the dark after they just fired 5+ rounds from the tube.
The kid who picked up his deputy dad's AR15 didn't shoot up their neighbors when he killed an intruder coming in through a window, yesterday the gentleman in Houston held 3 juveniles at rifle point until Police arrived and there has been a disturbing lack of home defense shootings that involve neighbors being shot when the defender and invader are shooting. You have no leg to stand on and no cases to cross reference where over penetration and home defense that has happened.
Yeah,
your neighbors right? If they didn't want to possibly have a stray bullet form their neighbor kill them, it's their own damn fault for not moving.That's nice of you to quote me, but you kinda missed the point of the entire post. It's kinda like if I took your line about shooting girl scouts and used it as proof that you're a mentally disturbed person that is looking to put holes in them with an AR-15 because you like entry wounds from .223/.556 better than shotguns.[/QUOTE]Nice deflection, you really have the attention span of a goldfish and a profound inability to read into satire. You just play into Biden's unlawful, uneducated hands of shotgun ownership and that's shameful.
What's really shameful is that you're assuming that whomever is defending their home with an AR15 is going to shoot at EVERY exterior wall like a complete idiot. You'd absolutely be flapping at the gums if you were speaking. In a home defense situation, the defender is not blasting willy nilly because he's completely incompetent, just because you may empty your magazine and hit the reload button on the controller doesn't mean people want to reload a shotgun in the dark after they just fired 5+ rounds from the tube.
The kid who picked up his deputy dad's AR15 didn't shoot up their neighbors when he killed an intruder coming in through a window, yesterday the gentleman in Houston held 3 juveniles at rifle point until Police arrived and there has been a disturbing lack of home defense shootings that involve neighbors being shot when the defender and invader are shooting. You have no leg to stand on and no cases to cross reference where over penetration and home defense that has happened.
The Crotch
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 15 (100%)
[quote name='dohdough']
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Mad39er']Nice deflection, you really have the attention span of a goldfish and a profound inability to read into satire. You just play into Biden's unlawful, uneducated hands of shotgun ownership and that's shameful.[/quote]
That's nice and all, but the only thing in common between what I said and what Biden said is that we referenced shotguns. Not to mention that your "article" comes from a right wing rag without the entire comment. Nice try though.
As for my "inability to read into satire," maybe you should work on writing satire instead because your example sucked even by Poe's Law standards.
That's nice and all, but the only thing in common between what I said and what Biden said is that we referenced shotguns. Not to mention that your "article" comes from a right wing rag without the entire comment. Nice try though.
As for my "inability to read into satire," maybe you should work on writing satire instead because your example sucked even by Poe's Law standards.
Yeah, I totally said that someone was going to go Rambo on their walls with a shotgun. Btw, if the person just emptied their gun like you just said, that's a lot of lead flying around and in case you haven't noticed, is making the argument that you're accusing me of making, which I never made to begin with. It's called a strawman. Look it up.
Yesterday, I saw Batman beat up a guy some weird face mask that constantly feeds him analgesics. Then some weird lady in an oddly fitting body suit rolled in on an even weirder motorcycle with wheels from a truck and killed the guy in the mask with a rocket launcher. True story!
Uh dude, here's the full quote from the Examiner, another unrelated rag.
LOL at you throwing a strawman when being called out on your complete lack of anything to back it up.
Shotgun Joe Biden. Just search "Joe Biden shotgun through door" on google, tell me I'm wrong when that many people are quoting him.
LOL at you throwing a strawman when being called out on your complete lack of anything to back it up.
[quote name='ID2006']That quote from Biden was weird. Why would he suggest shooting through a door if you don't know for sure who's on the other end?
Was there some context I missed or does he probably mean it?[/QUOTE]
I'm actually watching the video right now...LOLZ.
It was a facebook townhall sponsored by Parents Magazine. Biden's actually doing pretty good, but he clearly loves shotguns.:lol:
Link if you're interested: http://www.parents.com/blogs/parent...-in-facebook-town-hall-with-parents-magazine/
Easier to post extremist right wing editorials than go straight to the source and do your own fact checking I guess.
edit: That's the wrong interview actually., finding this thing is frustrating as hell. I already had to wade through 10+ pages of freeper bullshit and am not doing it anymore.
Was there some context I missed or does he probably mean it?[/QUOTE]
I'm actually watching the video right now...LOLZ.
It was a facebook townhall sponsored by Parents Magazine. Biden's actually doing pretty good, but he clearly loves shotguns.:lol:
Link if you're interested: http://www.parents.com/blogs/parent...-in-facebook-town-hall-with-parents-magazine/
Easier to post extremist right wing editorials than go straight to the source and do your own fact checking I guess.
edit: That's the wrong interview actually.
, finding this thing is frustrating as hell. I already had to wade through 10+ pages of freeper bullshit and am not doing it anymore.
Last edited by a moderator:
perdition(troy
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (89%)
http://www.fieldandstream.com/articles/guns/2013/02/gun-control-joe-biden-interview
It wasn't that hard to find the interview.
It wasn't that hard to find the interview.
[quote name='perdition(troy']http://www.fieldandstream.com/articles/guns/2013/02/gun-control-joe-biden-interview
It wasn't that hard to find the interview.[/QUOTE]
I must be the dumbest motherer to ever be a member of CAG and I deserve to treated that way because I couldn't find that link that was in one of the provided links.
...or maybe, that isn't the original townhall that Biden referenced in that interview with F&S or in those right-wing tabloids.
Must be the former because I never read anything from right-wing nutters or any of the crap they try to pass off as "facts" up in this bitch.
It wasn't that hard to find the interview.[/QUOTE]
I must be the dumbest mother
er to ever be a member of CAG and I deserve to treated that way because I couldn't find that link that was in one of the provided links....or maybe, that isn't the original townhall that Biden referenced in that interview with F&S or in those right-wing tabloids.
Must be the former because I never read anything from right-wing nutters or any of the crap they try to pass off as "facts" up in this bitch.
[quote name='dohdough']I must be the dumbest motherer to ever be a member of CAG and I deserve to treated that way because I couldn't find that link that was in one of the provided links.
...or maybe, that isn't the original townhall that Biden referenced in that interview with F&S or in those right-wing tabloids.
Must be the former because I never read anything from right-wing nutters or any of the crap they try to pass off as "facts" up in this bitch.[/QUOTE]
He did do a town hall and after that he did an interview for Field and Stream. The two are very similar in their wording because he's a nutjob that started them in the same exact way. One has video of him shooting an imaginary shotgun as he tells his wife to fire off two blasts into the air, which is a crime, the other is this one, which is also a crime in which a man in Virginia got arrested for doing.
er to ever be a member of CAG and I deserve to treated that way because I couldn't find that link that was in one of the provided links....or maybe, that isn't the original townhall that Biden referenced in that interview with F&S or in those right-wing tabloids.
Must be the former because I never read anything from right-wing nutters or any of the crap they try to pass off as "facts" up in this bitch.
[/QUOTE]He did do a town hall and after that he did an interview for Field and Stream. The two are very similar in their wording because he's a nutjob that started them in the same exact way. One has video of him shooting an imaginary shotgun as he tells his wife to fire off two blasts into the air, which is a crime, the other is this one, which is also a crime in which a man in Virginia got arrested for doing.
[quote name='Mad39er']He did do a town hall and after that he did an interview for Field and Stream. The two are very similar in their wording because he's a nutjob that started them in the same exact way. One has video of him shooting an imaginary shotgun as he tells his wife to fire off two blasts into the air, which is a crime, the other is this one, which is also a crime in which a man in Virginia got arrested for doing.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the link to the original townhall, holmes!
You'll have to forgive me(or not) if I don't take your word for it considering your problems taking my posts out of context.
Thanks for the link to the original townhall, holmes!
You'll have to forgive me(or not) if I don't take your word for it considering your problems taking my posts out of context.
[quote name='dohdough']One possible reason why there's "silence" is because the question is a strawman and out of context.
Clak's point wasn't about making AR-15's illegal, but that they're less than ideal for home defense for the same reason why you wouldn't use a sledge hammer to put a thumbtack into a cork board: you want to use the correct tools for the job. You could use a sledge hammer, but you're a lot better off using your thumb. I've made the same argument several times and some idiot was pulling the same schtick.
The versatility of the shotgun for using different types of shells as well as the the mechanics behind it make it more ideal for home defense than the average length semi-auto rifle and in some situations, even more than a handgun. You don't have to be as accurate and if you're using the correct load, you won't be sending projectiles into your neighbors houses. But hey, I don't know shit about guns so maybe you can explain why an AR-15 is better for home defense.[/QUOTE]Actually the silence is partly because I never see any of his posts thanks to the wonders of Greasemonkey and scripting. It's also partly because I was away in the Caribbean, mon.
Clak's point wasn't about making AR-15's illegal, but that they're less than ideal for home defense for the same reason why you wouldn't use a sledge hammer to put a thumbtack into a cork board: you want to use the correct tools for the job. You could use a sledge hammer, but you're a lot better off using your thumb. I've made the same argument several times and some idiot was pulling the same schtick.
The versatility of the shotgun for using different types of shells as well as the the mechanics behind it make it more ideal for home defense than the average length semi-auto rifle and in some situations, even more than a handgun. You don't have to be as accurate and if you're using the correct load, you won't be sending projectiles into your neighbors houses. But hey, I don't know shit about guns so maybe you can explain why an AR-15 is better for home defense.[/QUOTE]Actually the silence is partly because I never see any of his posts thanks to the wonders of Greasemonkey and scripting. It's also partly because I was away in the Caribbean, mon.
[quote name='KennyOO7']The 8 days of silence towards your question is comforting. Always drove me nuts that gun owners are consistently asked to justify their purchases while other purchases of 'excess' go unquestioned.
"You don't need them" seems to be what most people lean on.[/QUOTE]
Sorry I didn't see this, I just assumed the thread moved on because they couldn't answer the question.
You got it exactly though.
The response from dohdough highlights the games they play. They call it strawman as if that absolves them of their hypocrisy and moot points.
Biden wants to renew the assault weapons ban, Obama wants to renew the assault weapons ban, quiite a few members of Congress want to renew the assault weapons ban. So I ask why? And I get these jokers saying "we don't want to" while at the same time pushing Biden's shotgun strategy, and asking why we need assault weapons.
Yeah you don't want to get rid of them at all.
[quote name='Clak']Actually the silence is partly because I never see any of his posts thanks to the wonders of Greasemonkey and scripting. It's also partly because I was away in the Caribbean, mon.[/QUOTE]
Great, well maybe one of your flunkies can give me a fact based reason for what you have been pushing for 54 pages of this thread.
If you see this then you can yourself. I would also like to confirm whether or not you think assault weapons should be banned?
"You don't need them" seems to be what most people lean on.[/QUOTE]
Sorry I didn't see this, I just assumed the thread moved on because they couldn't answer the question.
You got it exactly though.
The response from dohdough highlights the games they play. They call it strawman as if that absolves them of their hypocrisy and moot points.
Biden wants to renew the assault weapons ban, Obama wants to renew the assault weapons ban, quiite a few members of Congress want to renew the assault weapons ban. So I ask why? And I get these jokers saying "we don't want to"
while at the same time pushing Biden's shotgun strategy, and asking why we need assault weapons.Yeah you don't want to get rid of them at all.
[quote name='Clak']Actually the silence is partly because I never see any of his posts thanks to the wonders of Greasemonkey and scripting. It's also partly because I was away in the Caribbean, mon.
[/QUOTE]Great, well maybe one of your flunkies can give me a fact based reason for what you have been pushing for 54 pages of this thread.
If you see this then you can yourself. I would also like to confirm whether or not you think assault weapons should be banned?
I like how liberals argue for abortions, that I could see as murder (I've held miscarried babies in my hands that were within the allotted legal abortion time limits. They look like fully formed little humans.) by saying that a woman's body is hers and she can make any choice she wants, yet my home and family's defense is an open matter of discussion for the gov't to decide. Having a 30 round clip doesn't guarantee the end of a life like abortion does.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='egofed'](I've held miscarried babies in my hands that were within the allotted legal abortion time limits. They look like fully formed little humans.)[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the update. Can I submit this to "This Week in Science"?
Thanks for the update. Can I submit this to "This Week in Science"?
[quote name='egofed']I like how liberals argue for abortions, that I could see as murder (I've held miscarried babies in my hands that were within the allotted legal abortion time limits. They look like fully formed little humans.) by saying that a woman's body is hers and she can make any choice she wants, yet my home and family's defense is an open matter of discussion for the gov't to decide. Having a 30 round clip doesn't guarantee the end of a life like abortion does.[/QUOTE]
Really depends how your using it though doesn't it, are you trying to shoot a pumpkin 1000 yards away or shoot shoot blatantly in a pumpkin patch.
Really depends how your using it though doesn't it, are you trying to shoot a pumpkin 1000 yards away or shoot shoot blatantly in a pumpkin patch.
bread's done