[quote name='TYSON' date='Jul 22 2005, 11:28 PM']I feel sorry for the police down there, I really do. I've been pulled over here at all hours of the night. I have NEVER seen a police officer lay a hand on their gun while approaching my car. Do you think they do it there for the fun of it?


[/quote]



I've been pulled over while carrying. Cop comes to the window I hand him both my license and permit. Cops around here prefer people with a permit because they feel safer knowing your smart enough to keep a level head and will not do anything stupid. I've not been pulled over often but I've never had a problem so far.



I aslo agree that not everyone should be able to get a firearm but for those able, I think we shouldn't have to jump through 5000 hoops just to purchase one.



[quote name='nismo convert' date='Jul 22 2005, 11:47 PM']I'm definately with Tyson on this, guns are ment to be used for food and survival from food that can eat you ie bear, damn yoggy. guns are used on farms to protect livestock, and to kill things so you can eat them, or put them out of their missery. i also have been pulled over MANY TIMES and never have i seen the gun drawn, or hand near the gun, maybe because i am curtious and pull into a well lit area so the officer feels more comfortable i donno, but it works. your gun laws, or lack there of suck.


[/quote]



You forgot one, protection of you and your family.

I'm 21 years old. A qualified marksman with a pistol, rifle, and machine gun. Also a graduate of the Army's Sniper school at Ft. Benning, GA and a graduate of numerous CQB and tactical shooting schools througout this country.



Heres the question, should I get special treatment because I obviously know how to handle a weapon? Just because I'm trained to wield it? Or should someone with my credentials have to jump through six-million hoops to be able to buy/own/carry a weapon?



In the states you can't differentiate. I know I'd be pissed as hell if someone judged me because of my age and would'nt grant me a concealed license. The US right now, has a fair gun law, that isnt partial towards anyone, and at the same time keeps guns out of certain people's hands. Sure, there are ways around it. But what law is there that you can't find a loophole in? Very few. Its been said before and I'll say it again. Banning certain types of weapons is asinine. Those bad-people are always gonna get their hands on them regardless of what law is in effect. Personally i'd rather be able to meet a criminal head to head with an evenly matched weapon. I dont think it would be too fair to go up against the guy trying to rape you're daughter with a break-action .22 cal squirrel rifle when hes packing a tactical shotgun or assault rifle.

[quote name='TYSON' date='Jul 22 2005, 07:38 PM']Please point out which one of these awful items' https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...>/rolleyes.gif sole purpose is to kill people or practice killing people.



And don't try to tell me you can use a 9mm or a 5.56mm FMJ round to hunt.



Then go tell the kid locked in the Lexan box at a 24hr gas station that he lives in freedom.



https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683785.gif


[/quote]



9mm is worthless. I'd sure as **** rather be hit by it than a .45acp, .38, .357magnum etc.



Full metal-jacket are some of the few rounds approved by the Geneva convention due to the fact that they dont cause an extraneous amount of damage, they go in and out. When someone attacks my family they are gonna swallow hollow-points, not FMJ. Are you trying to say these two types of cartriages are overkill? I'm confused. https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683561.gif

[quote name='SilverSeven' date='Jul 23 2005, 06:26 AM']The anti-gun arguement, no matter how well intentioned presents an impossible solution.



1. Very few people should be allowed to own guns, but not people who could possibly someday use them to hurt people. Ok, here's the thing. People who break laws with guns will have no problems breaking laws to GET guns. So making guns nearly impossible to get will only make it easier forcrimes to be comitted, because the criminal will know that 99% of people they might want to rape/rob/highjack/kill won't be armed. It'll be a free for all.



2. Well, you don't really have a viable second option. We could melt all guns and build one big ass flower sculpture. But then a bird might conk his head flying into it and you'll all be crying about the "killer flower" with no other purpose but to hurt widdle birdies.



3. Mob movies would suck without guns. You would essentially be killing Martin Scorsese. How would you feel then, huh?


[/quote]

Point 1 is rubbish. In Ireland we still have guns and plenty of them, but they're owned by people with a licence (which takes longer than 10 days to get BTW https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...DIR). The result being there is so few of them in the wrong hands that even the police don't need to carry guns. We still have a proportionate amount of criminals, but it's very rare that you ever hear of someone being shot. And like I said the people who enjoy guns are free to enjoy them. Obviously it would be nigh on impossible to have this situation in America, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't try.



Mark

Point 1 isnt rubbish.



Sure you guys have you're laws and it works great for you. You forget America has a 2nd ammendment that says everyone has the right to bear arms.



And I'd be damned if i have devote an assload of time to get licensed to own a weapon. Especially since 90% of the time my weapons never leave my property.

[quote name='TYSON' date='Jul 22 2005, 10:38 PM']Please point out which one of these awful items' https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...>/rolleyes.gif sole purpose is to kill people or practice killing people.





https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683785.gif


[/quote]



I must take vigorous exception to the statement that guns are solely used to kill people. They are tools used for hunting, recreation, and self-preservation. A criminal will most often avoid confrontation with a victim that he knows to be armed, and in that sense firearms are a very powerful deterrent to violence. I own several firearms and I certainly didn't buy them for the sole purpose of killing people. https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683785.gif



How often does it have to be said? The solution to gun violence in the US is to put the offenders in jail. And to keep them there. If the majority of gun violence is committed by repeat offenders, then it makes sense to me to eliminate the offenders.



The problem of gun violence in the US is not simply the result of gun laws. There are a variety of societal issues including poverty, drugs, and ignorance that entice some people into a life of crime. Making guns go away won't address these issues and it won't solve the problem of violent crime.

[quote name='inanimate_object' date='Jul 23 2005, 02:07 AM']Point 1 is rubbish. In Ireland we still have guns and plenty of them, but they're owned by people with a licence (which takes longer than 10 days to get BTW https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...DIR). The result being there is so few of them in the wrong hands that even the police don't need to carry guns. We still have a proportionate amount of criminals, but it's very rare that you ever hear of someone being shot. And like I said the people who enjoy guns are free to enjoy them. Obviously it would be nigh on impossible to have this situation in America, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't try.



Mark


[/quote]



You also don't have Mexico just south of you for the criminals to smuggle their guns in through. If we made it difficult to get guns, or made it take a ton of time, people that didn't worry about it a whole lot wouldn't have guns, while every criminal that wanted one still would.



The old bumpersticker is true. Criminals prefer unarmed victims.

I think everyone here needs to watch the Penn and Teller episode regarding gun control. As rediculous as that show can be, that one really gets the point across.

[quote name='sweet7' date='Jul 23 2005, 11:19 AM']Point 1 isnt rubbish.



Sure you guys have you're laws and it works great for you. You forget America has a 2nd ammendment that says everyone has the right to bear arms.



And I'd be damned if i have devote an assload of time to get licensed to own a weapon. Especially since 90% of the time my weapons never leave my property.


[/quote]

Everyone in Ireland also has a right to bear arms. And you don't have to devote any time, they do everything for you here - sure it takes about a month but isn't that a price worth paying if it means it keeps more guns out of the wrong hands?



[quote name='1988RedT2' date='Jul 23 2005, 12:28 PM']I must take vigorous exception to the statement that guns are solely used to kill people.



The problem of gun violence in the US is not simply the result of gun laws. There are a variety of societal issues including poverty, drugs, and ignorance that entice some people into a life of crime. Making guns go away won't address these issues and it won't solve the problem of violent crime.


[/quote]

Knives are used to prepare food

Cars are used for transporttation

Bowling balls are used for knocking over skittles

etc.



Aside from target practice, I can't think of anything something that a gun does that doesn't involve killing or maiming. That doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to have them, it just means they need to be treated with the respect they're due.



And IMO the guns as protection idea is totally rediculous, it's not going to deter robbers/criminals, how do they know who has a gun in their house? They don't so they bring one themselves just in case, next thing you know there's a gunfight going on in your house over a VCR.



Mark

[quote name='venomrx7' date='Jul 22 2005, 09:22 PM']Lol. I just finished cleaning my 5 round .38 special snub nose revolver. I like this thread.

I need a banana clip for mine. My biggest clip is a 25 round https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683664.gif and it quit working for some unknown reason...


[/quote]



Weak springs are usually the culprit or if they get bent.



The other thing I've found that goes wrong with them is the little latch, flap, whatever they call it gets bent down and causes a misfeed.



They used to make a huge drum clip for them but I think that got pulled off the market after someone went on a mass shooting spree in a rabbit colony.

[quote name='1988RedT2' date='Jul 23 2005, 07:28 AM']I must take vigorous exception to the statement that guns are solely used to kill people. They are tools used for hunting, recreation, and self-preservation. A criminal will most often avoid confrontation with a victim that he knows to be armed, and in that sense firearms are a very powerful deterrent to violence. I own several firearms and I certainly didn't buy them for the sole purpose of killing people. https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683785.gif



How often does it have to be said? The solution to gun violence in the US is to put the offenders in jail. And to keep them there. If the majority of gun violence is committed by repeat offenders, then it makes sense to me to eliminate the offenders.



The problem of gun violence in the US is not simply the result of gun laws. There are a variety of societal issues including poverty, drugs, and ignorance that entice some people into a life of crime. Making guns go away won't address these issues and it won't solve the problem of violent crime.


[/quote]





You still didn't read what I said, and Sweet7 misunderstood. I have never said "ALL GUNS ARE BAD!!!" like the sky was falling.



A 9mm and a 5.56mm FMJ round are ILLEGAL for hunting. (at least anywhere that has humane hunting laws) They are TOO SMALL. A 5.56mm FMJ is designed to INJURE, not kill, because and injured soldier requires 1 or 2 other soldiers to carry him away. So why do people keep saying they use them for hunting? 55 grain hollowtips for .223 (the heaviest I've seen for them) shatter when they hit a 1lb gopher or a 20lb coyote, I wouldn't WANT to use them for self defense.







You realize the guy I used as an example has pretty good qualifications too, right?



http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/03/29/profile.mcveigh/

We cant stop illegals and we cant stop gangs and drugs and we cant stop terrorism.

Those who to do this will. Only those who care, will follow the laws and those who commit crime or intend to , will use the same mind set to get guns. We cant controle human beings comming over open land and were supposed to controle millions of gun parts? Dont tilt the playing field more to the criminal by taking away any possible equalizer honest citizens currently have.

In Louisiana you CAN shoot someone in your yard and if someone comes to your car (outside). Car jacking asses can get wiped...so can a window washer ( JK) and tresspasser get smoked.

Dont preach to thoe quior about gun controle...wrong audience. Go talk to the drug dealors/users .They are the ones you have issues with.

BTW...go with out a gun ,with one hand in your pocket and the other one making a piece sign. https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...IR#>/smile.png

[quote name='TYSON' date='Jul 22 2005, 09:38 PM']Please point out which one of these awful items' https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...>/rolleyes.gif sole purpose is to kill people or practice killing people.



And don't try to tell me you can use a 9mm or a 5.56mm FMJ round to hunt.



Then go tell the kid locked in the Lexan box at a 24hr gas station that he lives in freedom.



https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683785.gif


[/quote]



You can hunt with any of those if you wish to but there are more efficent calibers to use. Of course if we're going to base gun sales and banning weapons on those then sooner or later all of them will be gone. Why? Because if you ask 20 gun owners what the best caliber for hunting whatever animal is you're going to get different answers and might just cause a minor war.



Last I checked I've never seen a gun jump up off a table and shoot someone. You of course missed the point about flies and ****. Way too many flies out there.



Purpose of a gun is not to kill someone it's to protect yourself. If that requires that you end the life of someone who obviously cares nothing for yours then offhand I'd say it's their problem.



Law. n. 1. A rule of conduct or procedure established by custom, agreement, or authority.



Criminal n 1. Someone who breaks laws.



Gun Law: Keeps you from having guns if you're a law abiding citizen.



Criminals don't follow laws.



Gee whiz Mr. Rogers I don't think criminals are going to let gun laws stop them! Wow wee I lurneded something!

[quote name='Rotarydragon' date='Jul 23 2005, 10:42 AM']You can hunt with any of those if you wish to but there are more efficent calibers to use. Of course if we're going to base gun sales and banning weapons on those then sooner or later all of them will be gone. Why? Because if you ask 20 gun owners what the best caliber for hunting whatever animal is you're going to get different answers and might just cause a minor war.



Last I checked I've never seen a gun jump up off a table and shoot someone. You of course missed the point about flies and ****. Way too many flies out there.



Purpose of a gun is not to kill someone it's to protect yourself. If that requires that you end the life of someone who obviously cares nothing for yours then offhand I'd say it's their problem.



Law. n. 1. A rule of conduct or procedure established by custom, agreement, or authority.



Criminal n 1. Someone who breaks laws.



Gun Law: Keeps you from having guns if you're a law abiding citizen.



Criminals don't follow laws.



Gee whiz Mr. Rogers I don't think criminals are going to let gun laws stop them! Wow wee I lurneded something!


[/quote]





Your theory on why violent crime seem to differ by a 10:1 ratio minimum between major cities in your country and major cities in our country then?



PS We have poverty, drugs and ignorance here too.

There's only one way to settle this argument once and for all--we need to have it out. All the guys without guns versus all the guys with guns in a battle to the death. Hmmmm....I wonder who's gonna win? https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683561.gif

So I was browsing the US Department of Justice this morning.....



So, in the process of denying 80 million law-abiding citizens what they feel are their rights to own a gun, we would have to leave 80% of gun toting criminals alone because they buy guns through an un-policeable source.



Here's the link, should you want to broaden your horizons a little.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm

[quote name='SilverSeven' date='Jul 23 2005, 01:58 PM']So I was browsing the US Department of Justice this morning.....

So, in the process of denying 80 million law-abiding citizens what they feel are their rights to own a gun, we would have to leave 80% of gun toting criminals alone because they buy guns through an un-policeable source.



Here's the link, should you want to broaden your horizons a little.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm


[/quote]





So basically these "law-abiding" citizens are buying guns legally and selling them illegally to criminals? Sounds about right. If family and friends of criminals did not have easy access to weapons neither would the criminal they gave it to.



Be interesting to know how many weapons are still in the possession of the person who filled out the forms. Somehow I doubt those "illegal means" are by breaking in to the armory at a military base or police station.

I carry a gun because it dispenses flowers to the elderly.

Does anyone here acctually know why the right to own a gun exists in the first place?

[quote name='TYSON' date='Jul 23 2005, 10:11 AM']So basically these "law-abiding" citizens are buying guns legally and selling them illegally to criminals? Sounds about right. If family and friends of criminals did not have easy access to weapons neither would the criminal they gave it to.



Be interesting to know how many weapons are still in the possession of the person who filled out the forms. Somehow I doubt those "illegal means" are by breaking in to the armory at a military base or police station.


[/quote]

Illegal means could also include buying them from a fence who got them from someone who did steal them from a govt organization or buying from a supplier from out of the country.



Option One. Take everyone's guns away.



Impossible, there are too many people who feel they have the right to own them who will not for any reason give them up. If you tried to do that you couldn't make a distinction between any guns because one they all have the same capabilities to be used violently. So you would have to take away everything from the genuine hunting rifle that in some places does actually provide food for families, and you'd have to take antique family heirlooms that may or may not have ever been used in the last 100 years, and you'd have to take single shot .22 target pistols (despite that fact that they are about as likely to cause widespread mayhem as a stiff wind), and you'd have to take personal gun from law enforcement officers, because if they're not checked in every night, then they might possibly get into the hands of criminals. I don't see that happening, ever.



Laws don't stop criminals. Laws restrict everyone else but the criminals. Sure you can make it harder for them, but banning private ownership will not make America the Urban Utopia that people think it will. Criminals will still have guns even if it's in reduced numbers, violent crimes commited with guns will still happen. But 80 million people will be deprived of either food, sport, or even just the freedom to do what they want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.



By '94, 223,000,000 guns had been manufactured for domestic use or imported into the US. That same year, 83,000 guns were identified as being used to commit a violent crime. You would think that would dispell the myth that guns are only used to hurt people, yet to some people that means we should take them all away, one bad seed ruins the whole apple. That would be like expelling an entire highschool of kids because one kid got in a fight.



If you all are so legislation happy, why not try to come up with something that a) is enforcable, and b) punishes the criminals rather than punishing everyone.



Why not push a law that requires a mandatory life sentence for any violent crime commited with a gun, or even for commiting a crime while in possession of a gun, even if it wasn't used in the crime. That would help get repeat offenders off of the streets, it would be a deterrent for the rather low percentage of criminals who do consider the consequences before acting, and best of all, it wouldn't do anything to the law-abiding citizens, because if they are using their guns in a completely legal fashion, they would have nothing to worry about.

[quote name='TYSON' date='Jul 23 2005, 06:36 AM']

You realize the guy I used as an example has pretty good qualifications too, right?



http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/03/29/profile.mcveigh/


[/quote]



I kinda take offense to that. A mechanized 11B (infantry) is no parallel to draw with me. Hes no better qualified than the thousands of other Infantry soldiers the wear a blue cord. My guys and I are a different breed of animal all together.

[quote name='venomrx7' date='Jul 23 2005, 11:19 AM']Does anyone here acctually know why the right to own a gun exists in the first place?


[/quote]



To keep the king of england out of your backyard.



But since we got off on the RIGHT foot with england we really dont have any need to shoot at...our ally...back in the day, there was no real need to.



In recent times though, the law shouldve been amended considering england helped you out in the iraq thing.





(the previous was learned completely off the simpsons and not through any actual study of your fine constitutional law)

The 2nd ammendment was established so that if it became necessary the people of the country could forcefully overthrow the government if it becomes tyrranic and corrupt. If THAT government is the one regulating the peoples rights to arms, then wouldn't that leave them at an advantage against the people. THe people would effectively be left defenseless when the government goes corrupt (worse than it already has)

in that case.. we need more guns.. tanks.. jets and rockets.. and bears that shoot lazers from their eyes.

[quote name='yayer' date='Jul 23 2005, 12:46 PM']in that case.. we need more guns.. tanks.. jets and rockets.. and bears that shoot lazers from their eyes.


[/quote]



Meh. not really. If an overthrow was launched, I'd bet that about half of or more of the military would join the revolt. Its not gonna happen any time soon, but its a possibility if things keep going the way they are.

Anouther reason for the 2nd admendment is.... If any country decided they were going to invade the USA they would be nuts... Lets invade a country with a few hundred million snipers. Iraq is bad enough with the few they have, but there is no country in the world that could possibly invade the USA and survive even if they did take out our military.



Also the 5.56mm (.223) is an excellent hunting round for small game from dog size down and it is not illegal to hunt with it. It has good acuracy and range.



anouther fact is that when the Brady bill was passed gun sales in the USA went up 400%



How many criminals use assult rifles? very few...



Why do the criminals that use assult rifles kill so many? it's not because they are using an assult rifle... It's because they are wearing body armor and the cops can't take them down.

firearms still don't kill people, the person behind the trigger does...



The 2nd amendment does guarantee the right for American citizens to bear arms, and they dont mean the appendages swinging from either side of the torso.



Keep your politics away from my firearms and everything will be fine.



If not, the dime club says i'm a member because I can put 5 rounds inside the diameter of a dime at 300 yards, I doubt putting 1 in your chest at 100 yards will be hard.

[quote name='89 Rag' date='Jul 23 2005, 06:18 PM']firearms still don't kill people, the person behind the trigger does...



The 2nd amendment does guarantee the right for American citizens to bear arms, and they dont mean the appendages swinging from either side of the torso.



Keep your politics away from my firearms and everything will be fine.



If not, the dime club says i'm a member because I can put 5 rounds inside the diameter of a dime at 300 yards, I doubt putting 1 in your chest at 100 yards will be hard.


[/quote]



I had a 7.62 mm mag that I could damn near do that with.



I could put the o out of a skoal can every time from ~275-300 (we shot across a field at the hunting lease I am a member of we don't have a set position. just wherever we set up)



I run down a balance about 5 skoal cans... however many are availiable at the time, and shoot away. Put at least part of the o our every single time. The scope that was on it came with it, and had no brand name on it or logos or anything. It had windage and everything though https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683561.gif



I sold that gun for car money. I miss it pretty bad. It was ****** awesome.

[quote name='Dragon' date='Jul 23 2005, 05:33 PM']Also the 5.56mm (.223) is an excellent hunting round for small game from dog size down and it is not illegal to hunt with it. It has good acuracy and range.

.
[/quote]



true dat. I took down a deer with my ruger 10/22. It was only a 75 yard shot, but it dropped him. (head shot, dead on).

[quote name='89 Rag' date='Jul 23 2005, 06:18 PM']firearms still don't kill people, the person behind the trigger does...



The 2nd amendment does guarantee the right for American citizens to bear arms, and they dont mean the appendages swinging from either side of the torso.



Keep your politics away from my firearms and everything will be fine.



If not, the dime club says i'm a member because I can put 5 rounds inside the diameter of a dime at 300 yards, I doubt putting 1 in your chest at 100 yards will be hard.


[/quote]



Way to put feelings into words https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...1047683894.gif

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.



Thomas Jefferson

"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Proposed Virginia Constitution, June, 1776

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book, 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764 .

yeah 1774 has alot to do with 300 years later.



and goodluck overthrowing the government they have too many 'patriots' running around.

Since we know criminals will get guns one way or another, let's do a simple test.



We'll all go stand on a street corner with 100lbs of gold boullion per person, I'll have my Mossberg 835, my SKS, and mu H&K USP9 copmact strapped to me, the rest of you can stand there with marigolds. We'll see who gets jacked last. https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...#>/biggrin.png

[quote name='defprun' date='Jul 24 2005, 06:29 PM']yeah 1774 has alot to do with 300 years later.



and goodluck overthrowing the government they have too many 'patriots' running around.


[/quote]



its 231 years later, and the message still shines through.

[quote name='defprun' date='Jul 24 2005, 05:29 PM']yeah 1774 has alot to do with 300 years later.



and goodluck overthrowing the government they have too many 'patriots' running around.


[/quote]





People are still the same. our tools and technology may change, but the human mentality is consistent throughout the ages.



What Thomas Jefferson said is VERY true.

BTW the "arms" Mr. Jefferson was referring to were the assult weapons of the day.

In the late 1700's defence & hunting weapons were an assumption not even worth noting.

The "malitia" of that day has evolved to the permitting process of today.

**** guns, where is my mule and 40 acres?

damn now i want a mule and 40 acres.

This is that .38 special that I mentioned cleaning earlier. Its a Ruger. I love the thing. The beer cap is there for size comparison.



Attachment 21504



Attachment 21505