(01-31-2013, 11:00 PM)w00t Wrote: I'm not saying guns should be outright banned, they aren't in the UK either. Sure, you can defend yourself with an automatic rifle, but you can defend yourself the same with a semiautomatic 9mm pistol.

(01-31-2013, 05:32 AM)w00t Wrote: I'm not saying drop your guns, I'm saying stop trying to have the same guns the army has. You don't need a fully automatic assault rifle, for insurgency or for day-to-day use(personal protection, hunting).

The Hitler argument never makes sense. Hitler also built a giant freeway using government money, should we ban that? Should we ban all things that can be made into lethal gas because Hitler used them?

(01-31-2013, 09:43 PM)The Anarchist Wrote:

(01-31-2013, 09:28 PM)w00t Wrote:

(01-31-2013, 08:08 PM)Fury Wrote:

(01-31-2013, 12:24 AM)w00t Wrote: You wouldn't have a fighting chance. You might be able to take over a whole province, but a few warships and a B2 would ruin the entire province.

I'm not trying to fight a damn war. I just want to hunt and defend my wife an daughter if someone tries to intrude. It happens everyday.

They want to limit clips to 10 rounds. I can tell you my wife is a terrible shot. Bullshit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then an automatic gun surely wouldn't help, as they're a bitch to aim, especially with no experience. Not to mention giving guns to people that can't aim sufficiently to hit a target is just asking for people getting caught in crossfire.

You also don't need more than 10 rounds, really. Even if you're completely panicked and just jerking the trigger, at least two rounds will hit your target if you have any experience with a gun.

Disregard the alarmingly stupid YouTube title, as I found the video while watching a parody and it just happened to remind me of this post. I tend to side with Ventura's argument and as I said, the 2nd amendment wasn't to protect hunters and farmers but was to provide a means of secession and protection if and when necessary. Sure, resistance might be futile in such an event, but that's no reason to take away military-grade weapons. Firearms (not necessarily the automatic ones) serve a legitimate purpose and provide protection during the 20-30 minutes it takes the cops to arrive. Keep in mind, in one of the noted incidents a teenager managed to stop armed robbers and defend his little sister - with an assault rifle. Whenever I hear British people make your argument, it truly saddens me. Not because you disagree with me, but because you have willingly given up a small amount of freedom, for a small amount of security. Like Ventura says, it's like banning cars because people have poor judgement and accidentally kill others while driving them. Additionally, I'd like to remind you that very few (if any) murders were committed by licensed automatic owners (that includes FFL dealers and Form-4 transferees).

“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” - Benjamin Franklin

(02-01-2013, 03:06 AM)Fury Wrote: Have you ever hunted with an AR-15? Doesn't sound like it, just saying..

Also building a freeway and registering jewish citizens, then slaughtering them is two TOTALLY different things. I, for one, think Adolf Hitler was one the most, if not THE MOST, effective influential speaker the world has ever seen. Not saying propaganda should be banned though.

Whether anyone likes it or not, patterns happen. History repeats it self, over, and over, and over again.

Eventually someone needs to start looking at the patterns or we will all be consumed in our own ignorance.

(02-01-2013, 04:22 AM)w00t Wrote:

(02-01-2013, 03:06 AM)Fury Wrote: Have you ever hunted with an AR-15? Doesn't sound like it, just saying..

Also building a freeway and registering jewish citizens, then slaughtering them is two TOTALLY different things. I, for one, think Adolf Hitler was one the most, if not THE MOST, effective influential speaker the world has ever seen. Not saying propaganda should be banned though.

Whether anyone likes it or not, patterns happen. History repeats it self, over, and over, and over again.

Eventually someone needs to start looking at the patterns or we will all be consumed in our own ignorance.

I've hunted with bigger guns than an AR-15 while I was on business in Alaska, and it wasn't even sporting. It takes no skill, and therefore has no challenge in it, to hold down a trigger and point.

Yes, Hitler was an effective speaker, in the end that's all that mattered. He didn't take the guns of the free people, did they stand up to a tyrannical government?

Also, at that Texas proposal, shit like this Texas. You're part of a union, act like it. Democracy works BECAUSE you can't pick and choose which parts of a democratically passed law system you like. The second you start refusing certain parts of the law because you don't like them, YOU'RE becoming the tyrant.

(02-01-2013, 05:07 AM)w00t Wrote: All states have the right to succeed, so I'm not sure where that come from. There isn't some law on the books that says "All states can't succeed, unless the state name starts with a T and rhymes with exas."

(02-01-2013, 04:37 AM)Fury Wrote:

(02-01-2013, 04:22 AM)w00t Wrote:

(02-01-2013, 03:06 AM)Fury Wrote: Have you ever hunted with an AR-15? Doesn't sound like it, just saying..

Also building a freeway and registering jewish citizens, then slaughtering them is two TOTALLY different things. I, for one, think Adolf Hitler was one the most, if not THE MOST, effective influential speaker the world has ever seen. Not saying propaganda should be banned though.

Whether anyone likes it or not, patterns happen. History repeats it self, over, and over, and over again.

Eventually someone needs to start looking at the patterns or we will all be consumed in our own ignorance.

I've hunted with bigger guns than an AR-15 while I was on business in Alaska, and it wasn't even sporting. It takes no skill, and therefore has no challenge in it, to hold down a trigger and point.

Yes, Hitler was an effective speaker, in the end that's all that mattered. He didn't take the guns of the free people, did they stand up to a tyrannical government?

Also, at that Texas proposal, shit like this Texas. You're part of a union, act like it. Democracy works BECAUSE you can't pick and choose which parts of a democratically passed law system you like. The second you start refusing certain parts of the law because you don't like them, YOU'RE becoming the tyrant.

In case you didn't know, Texas is the only state that legally has the right to succeed, if that's what you're referring to. I live in Texas. I do not agree with it. We would fall flat on our face. We have plenty of jobs and what not, but let's be honest..

All it takes is a few rednecks to start an uproar.

(02-01-2013, 05:07 AM)w00t Wrote: All states have the right to succeed, so I'm not sure where that come from. There isn't some law on the books that says "All states can't succeed, unless the state name starts with a T and rhymes with exas."