My FB post on guns & civillians...

[bodyhard]

There is absolutely no reason any civilian should have access to an automatic weapon, NONE. Why the f'ck would a mom want to purchase the type of guns this woman had? Why, for what? To hunt? What the f'ck was she planning on hunting 1000 ducks? 100 deers, WHAT? Why would any civilian need a gun that can shoot multiple bullets within seconds? If you want a gun to protect your home, get a revolver or a shotgun/rifle why would you need an AK47 or a glock? Who do you think is going to break into your home, the army? Wake the f'ck up people, there is no need for any person to own any kind of automatic weapon, there is absolutely no reason, NONE, any civilian should own a automatic or semi-automatic gun, none. These guns are made to kill period. I do however understand owning a hand gun (revolver) or shotgun/rifle in your home or place of business for protection. F'ck the second amendment/right to bear arms, the people who wrote it (and the ones who protect/believe in it) are f'cking dumb retarded motherf'ckers that should have THEIR children killed with an automatic weapon, maybe see first hand what that kind of gun does to the head of a child.

That is how I feel, you guys can carry on, on why you believe people should have the right and argue till your face turn blue.

[bzman]

I agree. But I dont like put pujt real personal stuff on ********. Mostly just jokes or fun **** im doing lol

[baker]

The 2nd amendment was written in the 1700s. Doesn't really apply to our modern lives in my opinion.

[SP1966]

Why would any civilian need a gun that can shoot multiple bullets within seconds? If you want a gun to protect your home, get a revolver or a shotgun/rifle why would you need an AK47 or a glock?

The reason a semi-auto pistol is good for self defense is under stress your aim is going to be less the perfect. They're also quicker to re-load. Revolvers are antiques, they are of significantly less value from a self defense perspective. As for AK's or M4's they are primarily hobbyist rifles. Having trained with M16's in the Marines it is enjoyable to take one target shooting.

I find it more then just a bit ironic that you of all people with your history of glorifying violence as some sort of manly art would pretend to pass judgement on gun owners, 99.9% of which have never assaulted anyone with or without a weapon.

F'ck the second amendment/right to bear arms, the people who wrote it (and the ones who protect/believe in it) are f'cking dumb retarded motherf'ckers that should have THEIR children killed with an automatic weapon, maybe see first hand what that kind of gun does to the head of a child.

There is a thread about uniformed opinions, the above fits perfectly in that thread.

[MarkS51]

There is absolutely no reason any civilian should have access to an automatic weapon, NONE. Why the f'ck would a mom want to purchase the type of guns this woman had? Why, for what? To hunt? What the f'ck was she planning on hunting 1000 ducks? 100 deers, WHAT? Why would any civilian need a gun that can shoot multiple bullets within seconds? If you want a gun to protect your home, get a revolver or a shotgun/rifle why would you need an AK47 or a glock? Who do you think is going to break into your home, the army? Wake the f'ck up people, there is no need for any person to own any kind of automatic weapon, there is absolutely no reason, NONE, any civilian should own a automatic or semi-automatic gun, none. These guns are made to kill period. I do however understand owning a hand gun (revolver) or shotgun/rifle in your home or place of business for protection. F'ck the second amendment/right to bear arms, the people who wrote it (and the ones who protect/believe in it) are f'cking dumb retarded motherf'ckers that should have THEIR children killed with an automatic weapon, maybe see first hand what that kind of gun does to the head of a child.

That is how I feel, you guys can carry on, on why you believe people should have the right and argue till your face turn blue.

Easy there amigo. It wasn't an "automatic" weapon nor is it a particularly heavy caliber. It's was a .223 Bushmaster M4 Carbine SEMI-Automatic, meaning 1 trigger pull, 1 shot. Not full auto. Full autos have been regulated and prohibited from general ownership since 1934. You have to have a Federal Class III firearms license to own them, although that never stops the gang-bangers down the street does it? It's true a .223 is the same caliber as our military rifles but a lot less powerful than most hunting rifles. Further, they are used in teeny-tiny fraction of crimes because they are hard to conceal. Know what the #1 weapon of choice is? .38 special snubbies that can be hidden real easy, are simple to use, don't jam and are cheap. What IS different is these type rifles LOOK real scary with black stocks, pistol grips, bayonet lugs, flash suppressors and other military-esque features but are in fact no more dangerous than many, many rifles hunters use every day.

And that's the problem because otherwise reasonable people like you, who readily agree to a right to bear arms, get kind of bamboozled by a lying media into believing things that just aren't true. The gun didn't do it and didn't force the kid to do it. Millions of law-abiding folks own such guns and don't go gunning others down. Like me for instance. It was a SICK, DERANGED KID who CHOSE to kill other human beings. Blame him, not his choice of weapons because he could have done just as much damage with just the pistols just like the W. VA killer did a few years back.

[MarkS51]

The 2nd amendment was written in the 1700s. Doesn't really apply to our modern lives in my opinion.

How about the first? Does that pass muster with you?

[mtpockets]

the people who wrote it (and the ones who protect/believe in it) are f'cking dumb retarded motherf'ckers that should have THEIR children killed with an automatic weapon, maybe see first hand what that kind of gun does to the head of a child.

.

Of all the stupid **** posted on this forum, I think you topped the list with the killing of children comment.

Get yourself some help.

[ClubGitmo]

Easy there amigo. It wasn't an "automatic" weapon nor is it a particularly heavy caliber. It's was a .223 Bushmaster M4 Carbine SEMI-Automatic, meaning 1 trigger pull, 1 shot. Not full auto. Full autos have been regulated and prohibited from general ownership since 1934. You have to have a Federal Class III firearms license to own them, although that never stops the gang-bangers down the street does it? It's true a .223 is the same caliber as our military rifles but a lot less powerful than most hunting rifles. Further, they are used in teeny-tiny fraction of crimes because they are hard to conceal. Know what the #1 weapon of choice is? .38 special snubbies that can be hidden real easy, are simple to use, don't jam and are cheap. What IS different is these type rifles LOOK real scary with black stocks, pistol grips, bayonet lugs, flash suppressors and other military-esque features but are in fact no more dangerous than many, many rifles hunters use every day.

And that's the problem because otherwise reasonable people like you, who readily agree to a right to bear arms, get kind of bamboozled by a lying media into believing things that just aren't true. The gun didn't do it and didn't force the kid to do it. Millions of law-abiding folks own such guns and don't go gunning others down. Like me for instance. It was a SICK, DERANGED KID who CHOSE to kill other human beings. Blame him, not his choice of weapons because he could have done just as much damage with just the pistols just like the W. VA killer did a few years back.

This ^. Every word.

I don't care that you (OP) don't understand why anyone would want to own such weapons, and I don't care that YOU don't care to properly educate yourself on the matter. However, don't stay uneducated and boisterous with your opinions. The two don't mix.

[induced_drag]

[Edit] Mark51 posted almost the same thing....funny. I did not see it until I posted my comment.
Obviously I agree....




Yea BH.. You are also confusing semi-auto and "automatic". An AR-15 is a "semi-automatic" rifle. Meaning one pull of the trigger results in one shot. The ammo used is actually poor and more efficient at wounding then killing. Actually one of the reasons it was chosen as a wounded soldier takes another two to tend to him. (or so I have heard behind the reasoning of the military's selection of this ammo).


There are many semi-auto civilian hunting rifles that would do more damage, but dont look nearly as sinister as the AR15.

Heck, if someone were to use a shotgun with buck shot, it probably would be the most devastating in a crowded area.

As despicable as the events were, the fact remains true....people kill people not guns. It is disgusting what happened, but isolated acts of violence have been a part of human nature since our existence. You will never legislate it out by banning certain weapons. The sick and twisted will find a way to extract the damage they desire. Much the same way that making drugs illegal, does little to stop their proliferation.

Contrast that with the idea that if those who desired and were responsible could carry concealed in places that are now currently banned, acts like this might be less common or ended much quicker with a way to defend against a lone gunman.

No hate...just my opinion.

[so-tex]

The 2nd amendment was written in the 1700s. Doesn't really apply to our modern lives in my opinion.

The 2nd ammendment was/is to protect us from a tyrannical government.

[Corbi]

Bit of clarification to further Marks post, this kid didn't even use the Bushmaster AR, that weapon was supposedly found in his vehicle and it certainly was not an automatic, huge difference between semi-auto and full auto. He had 2 handguns on him, a Sig and a Glock, I believe the Sig held 15 rds and the Glock 17. Both of these are also semi-auto, guns in real life are not like the movies where everyone has full auto and can spray bullets for a full minute without ever changing magazines.

I have a .22 Mossberg tactical, it's nothing but a fancied up .22 rifle but to the vast majority of people it's an "assault weapon", whatever that term even means? BTW did you know more people are killed here in the USA on a daily basis with little .22's and .38's than have ever been killed with one of the so called AR assault rifles?

[so-tex]

Of all the stupid **** posted on this forum, I think you topped the list with the killing of children comment.

Get yourself some help.

I agree. Very tasteless.

[Karl_Hungus]

While I agree that these school shooting incidents are terrible, the magnitude of the problem is not commensurate with the media coverage they garner. To put it in perspective, if there are 55 million K-12 students, and 30 die per year at the hands of a school shooter, that puts the odds of dying in a given year at 1 in 1.8 million. Thus, you are 39 times more likely to die crossing the street, more than twice as likely to get struck by lightning, and 5 times as likely to die by falling off of furniture! In fact, I came across a statistic that, at current rates, a given school could expect a shooting about once every 12,800 years.

[EB68]

Not trying to be an ass, but speeders kill more people than guns do many times over every year. Is this to mean that there should be no vehicles produced that can surpass the speed limit? This scenario could be used for lots of other things as well. Drugs are illegal in most areas but thousands die every week from drug overdoses. Banning firearms only disarms those who are honest and law abiding. BH you have some of the strictest gun laws of the nation in your state, but one of the highest crime rates, do you ever wonder why?

[weiss1967]

strongly disagree with BH. Your way of thinking doesn't make anybody safer, and takes away fundamental right to own firearms. This topic has been beat to death many times on every level. Police doesn't protect anybody, their job is to investigate and bring to justice. The actual safety is in your hands. Will always be. Banning certain firearms judging by the way "they look kinda scary" or because they were labeled "an assault weapon" (whta tfk does it mean anyway) is stupid. Yes, stupid. All my hunting rifles are civilian versions of those "scary badass assault" rifles, they are modern, ergonomic and pleasant to shoot. BH take my advice - go the range, squeeze a few rounds from that same glok and be happy. Stop bitchinig about sнit you don't know

[Bushmaster]

If you want a gun to protect your home, get a revolver or a shotgun/rifle why would you need an AK47 or a glock?

An AK-47 is a rifle lol.

[SP1966]

Not trying to be an ass, but speeders kill more people than guns do many times over every year. Is this to mean that there should be no vehicles produced that can surpass the speed limit? This scenario could be used for lots of other things as well. Drugs are illegal in most areas but thousands die every week from drug overdoses. Banning firearms only disarms those who are honest and law abiding. BH you have some of the strictest gun laws of the nation in your state, but one of the highest crime rates, do you ever wonder why?

Wondering requires thought. Gun control rants are purely an emotional exercise.

[KeepItMoving]

There is absolutely no reason any civilian should have access to an automatic weapon, NONE. Why the f'ck would a mom want to purchase the type of guns this woman had? Why, for what? To hunt? What the f'ck was she planning on hunting 1000 ducks? 100 deers, WHAT? Why would any civilian need a gun that can shoot multiple bullets within seconds? If you want a gun to protect your home, get a revolver or a shotgun/rifle why would you need an AK47 or a glock? Who do you think is going to break into your home, the army? Wake the f'ck up people, there is no need for any person to own any kind of automatic weapon, there is absolutely no reason, NONE, any civilian should own a automatic or semi-automatic gun, none. These guns are made to kill period. I do however understand owning a hand gun (revolver) or shotgun/rifle in your home or place of business for protection. F'ck the second amendment/right to bear arms, the people who wrote it (and the ones who protect/believe in it) are f'cking dumb retarded motherf'ckers that should have THEIR children killed with an automatic weapon, maybe see first hand what that kind of gun does to the head of a child.

That is how I feel, you guys can carry on, on why you believe people should have the right and argue till your face turn blue.

You're flat out wrong on about 4 or 5 of you key assertions here. And then, you go on to use them as the basis for your position.

[Bushmaster]

NONE, any civilian should own a automatic or semi-automatic gun, none. These guns are made to kill period. I do however understand owning a hand gun (revolver)

Hey OP, which of these two guns do you approve of, and why?

9mm Double Action Revolver...



9mm Glock Automatic...

[so-tex]

Hey OP, which of these two guns do you approve of, and why?

9mm Double Action Revolver...



9mm Glock Automatic...

I will bet the farm that the revolver (top picture) kills more people over the Glock.

[Bushmaster]

I will bet the farm that the revolver (top picture) kills more people over the Glock.

Hard to say... I've just always found it hilarious though how some guns are considered "evil" simply because of the way they look. OP himself said he doesn't mind anybody having a revolver - but teh Glocks are bad lol Nevermind that they both fire the same bullet lol.

[baker]

The 2nd ammendment was/is to protect us from a tyrannical government.

I understand why it was originally written and for the record I do own firearms. They are in a safe, locked up and away from my children. I believe that the law needs..... attention is a good word. I certainly don't have the answers, don't think any of us do.

[paolo59]

There is so much ignorance when it comes to guns, statistics, and tragedies like the one that took place in Connecticut. The proponents of 'gun control' are counting on it. There will be a full court press by gun control advocates in the aftermath of what has taken place. There are politicians in Washington who are already demanding that the president "exploit" this tragedy. (The politician's word, not mine!) The Mayor of New York City is demanding that the president 'do something.' In his speach to the nation yesterday the president alluded to just that something. When politics becomes involved, unfortunately, ignorance is the required and prime mover of the issue!

[smokinal]

Lots of good points here. I guess I'll throw in my favorite quote of "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns".

[paolo59]

While I agree that these school shooting incidents are terrible, the magnitude of the problem is not commensurate with the media coverage they garner. To put it in perspective, if there are 55 million K-12 students, and 30 die per year at the hands of a school shooter, that puts the odds of dying in a given year at 1 in 1.8 million. Thus, you are 39 times more likely to die crossing the street, more than twice as likely to get struck by lightning, and 5 times as likely to die by falling off of furniture! In fact, I came across a statistic that, at current rates, a given school could expect a shooting about once every 12,800 years.

This x 1,0000^^^^^^^

The incidence of 'mass-shootings' is already being used on Capital Hill by proponents of gun control. "It happens more and more, and will continue to happen until we take action with gun control measures." Once again, politicians and ignorance. They seem to go hand in hand. Where there is one, there is always the other! These incidences are extremely rare. When they do take place, they are horrifyingly shocking. But by all statistics, they are not on the upsurge.

[Corbi]

These incidences are extremely rare. When they do take place, they are horrifyingly shocking. But by all statistics, they are not on the upsurge.

Gun related killings are actually way down from what they were a decade ago.

[pvsampson]

Lots of good points here. I guess I'll throw in my favorite quote of "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns".

Which is precisely what has happened here.

Strict licensing laws.

[so-tex]

This x 1,0000^^^^^^^

The incidence of 'mass-shootings' is already being used on Capital Hill by proponents of gun control. "It happens more and more, and will continue to happen until we take action with gun control measures." Once again, politicians and ignorance. They seem to go hand in hand. Where there is one, there is always the other! These incidences are extremely rare. When they do take place, they are horrifyingly shocking. But by all statistics, they are not on the upsurge.

And this is the reason why I am writing a check right now to send to the NRA.

[Marius_Ursus]

On the other hand if any of the teachers or administrators were packing...

[superman713]

And if the guy walked into the school with a couple machetes, would you want to ban those? Where does it end? Why take freedoms away from good citizens because of the evil acts of a few?

Do you know why the Japanese Generals feared and never fathomed invading the USA? Not out of fear of our military might, but because they knew there would be a gun behind every blade of grass.

The 2nd amendment is vital to our keeping government at bay. It ensures that we have the ability to take up arms against a tyranical government.

What happened in CT is truly a tragedy and my heart bleeds. I wish with all I am that I would have been there... ARMED! But to wish murder on the children of those who wrote or support the 2Nd amendment puts you at the level of the shooter.