Page: 1 2 3 Next > Jump to:  Bottom  Last Post
 abrxax
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 71 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 7:40:47 AM
Damn...Looks like Thomas Jefferson would have had a concealed carry permit and a 1911 |
|
abrxax
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
71 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 7:34:37 AM
"As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives [only] moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion to your walks."
-- Thomas Jefferson, writing to his teenaged nephew. |
|
abrxax
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
71 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 7:32:27 AM
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188 |
|
abrxax
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
71 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 7:32:05 AM
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"
-- George Washington |
|
abrxax
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
71 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 7:31:46 AM
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 |
|
abrxax
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
71 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 7:30:09 AM
@McGovern1981 here is the full text of the bill from swinestein
"To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to
keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes. "
Full AWB bill text |
|
 Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
3575 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 7:18:50 AM
@McGovern: Only one problem with your George Washington quote, which I'm seeing repeated by gun enthusiasts everywhere: IT'S A TOTAL FABRICATION.
Nowhere in Washington's speeches, essays, letters, or other writings, published or unpublished, does this quote appear. And as a student of American literature and history, I can assert that the idiom "sending a clear message" is modern and was not used in Washington's day.
I absolutely *detest* it when people concoct quotes to support their positions and then stuff them in the mouths of our founding fathers. I see this "quotation fraud" more and more lately, usually with Washington or Jefferson as the source, and it is despicable.
(My rant there is not directed at you there personally, McGovern. I know you aren't responsible for fabricating the quote and were, no doubt, passing it along in faith that it was factual.) |
|
 McGovern1981
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
10540 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 6:50:13 AM
Has the list these 150 guns been published??? |
|
 EVILLECUTTER
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
198 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 6:36:22 AM
i just bought a bb gun that looks just like an ar-15 ar rural king for $50 - suck on that |
|
 HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1211 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 6:26:01 AM
No application of restriction upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall exceed the application of restriction upon those in law enforcement
This. I've been arguing this for months now. I am glad to see that other people are arguing the same point as well. |
|
McGovern1981
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
10540 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 6:18:22 AM
 |
|
McGovern1981
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
10540 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 5:58:40 AM
Feinstein has been at this for over 20 years and is clearly senile and out of touch with what THE PEOPLE want. When there's states and sheriffs orginizations across the country saying we will not enforce these laws you should stop and listen to the people. |
|
abrxax
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
71 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 5:57:50 AM
I hope they ban all guns in the usa. I will keep mine and use them to rob your sorry asses. What are you going to do? Toss bleach at me? |
|
 securitywyrm
Male, 18-29, Western US
87 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 5:39:58 AM
I'd like to propose a new 2nd amendment; "No application of restriction upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall exceed the application of restriction upon those in law enforcement." Bam, there you go. New standard: "If the police can have it, you can have it." If they're arguing that the police need to be 'better armed' than a law-abiding citizen, they're saying that the police are 'above' law abiding citizens. |
|
 jendrian
Male, 18-29, Canada
2370 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 1:38:35 AM
Here you go turdburglar, I took the trouble to find this just for you. |
|
stk5m
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
198 Posts
|
Friday, March 15, 2013 1:23:42 AM
Let me get this straight, I can't buy a glock 17 but I can own a de-mil .50 cal? |
|
 whodat6484
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
2373 Posts
|
Thursday, March 14, 2013 11:35:23 PM
"It's almost like they're picking the weapons that commit a tiny minority of crimes and leaving the ones that commit the majority of crimes."
That's EXACTLY what they're doing, because they look scary. They keep calling them "military style assault weapons" and drilling that sh*t into peoples heads and it appears to be working. They may look the same, but functionally, they don't work the same way. Regardless of all the "assault weapon" bullsh*t they keep pushing, the overwhelming majority of homicides involving firearms are committed with handguns. The ones that happen every now & then that involve semi-automatic rifles, which is what they are, not assault rifles, are the ones you see on the news. |
|
 sonofd
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
37 Posts
|
Thursday, March 14, 2013 10:59:23 PM
I've been a gun owner for years and I can honestly say I've never harmed anyone (never even occured to me). And unless my wife, kids or myself are threatened with grave bodily harm, it'll stay that way. But I'll be damned if these politicians will take away my ability to defend my family from harm. Won't happen. No way. Oh, and the whole "assault weapons" thing is ridiculous. Fully automatic rifles have been outlawed for civilian use for years. What they are calling "assault weapons" is simply a semi-automatic rifle. One round for every trigger pull. Like most handguns..... Actually, all handguns..... Wait, actually ALL GUNS.......
More info here |
|
 OldOllie
Male, 50-59, Midwest US
8949 Posts
|
Thursday, March 14, 2013 10:48:53 PM
How about this, she can ban 150 guns, if I can ban 150 newspapers. That would leave AT LEAST 2,271 others. Fair? |
|
 turdburglar
Male, 30-39, Western US
1954 Posts
|
Thursday, March 14, 2013 9:05:49 PM
jendrian - You're avatar makes me laugh every time I see it. Should be the IAB mascot! |
|
turdburglar
Male, 30-39, Western US
1954 Posts
|
Thursday, March 14, 2013 9:04:41 PM
People here at IAB keep making comments like "we should try to make it harder for criminals to get guns". Some even make comments suggesting we take certain guns from people. They don't realize how many guns are in America. The government has NO IDEA who has weapons, how many, or where they are. If cops came to my house for guns I would simply say that I sold them to a homeless teenager for a nickel. It would be legal for me to do so.
With no records there is no way of disarming the public. At best you would disarm law abiding citizens.
Feel free to have the opinion that guns are bad, and we need less of them in America. If you want to complain and add restrictions to the bill of rights, you should at least have a realistic idea of how to do it. Simply saying "we need less guns" doesn't help.
My "things are fine the way they are" stance doesn't require an argument because I am not taking anyone's rights away.
|
|
turdburglar
Male, 30-39, Western US
1954 Posts
|
Thursday, March 14, 2013 8:51:22 PM
It's almost like they're picking the weapons that commit a tiny minority of crimes and leaving the ones that commit the majority of crimes.
Exactly. Why? The recent shootings, sensationalized by the media, have brought emotions and fear. Certain politicians are using the fear to further extreme actions. Make no mistake, limiting to the bill of rights is an extreme action.
They are targeting the weapons that appear scary to the uninformed. Even though these weapons are less likely than any other firearm to be used in a violent crime. They say it is to reduce violent crime. If that is true, the only logical conclusion is that the current proposed ban would be used as a stepping stone for future bans and restrictions, which would limit pistols and shotguns...the firearms which are actually used in violent crimes.
|
|
jendrian
Male, 18-29, Canada
2370 Posts
|
Thursday, March 14, 2013 8:48:11 PM
hahaha turdburglar, you made me lol |
|
Andrew155
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
1208 Posts
|
Thursday, March 14, 2013 8:22:24 PM
It's almost like they're picking the weapons that commit a tiny minority of crimes and leaving the ones that commit the majority of crimes. |
|
 AvatarJohn
Male, 30-39, Southern US
530 Posts
|
Thursday, March 14, 2013 8:22:16 PM
Can we ban books such as Catcher in the Rye and Heather Has Two Mommy's? After all, to paraphrase Senator Feinstein, "we should be happy with the millions of other books that the government is gracious enough to allow us to read", right? |
|
Page: 1 2 3 Next >
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}