Assult weapons ban expired?
09-13-2004 | 12:35 PM
#46
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,494
From: Participating in some Anarchy!
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Originally Posted by bassplayrr
^^^^ Hahahaha! Gun laws = racism. Right, Oaf. 
I'm against many types of gun control (i.e. considering any rifle with a pistol grip an assult rifle 
) as well, but to consider gun control racism is absurd.
-Chris
I'm against many types of gun control (i.e. considering any rifle with a pistol grip an assult rifle ) as well, but to consider gun control racism is absurd.-Chris
Then those "upity" Black Panthers "invaded" the State Capitol building, resulting in the State Legislature quickly replacing "open carry" with "concelled carry".
Open carry is/was only allowed in the unincorporated areas of a few counties, and in all other counties, one has to prove that they need concelled carry permit.
The reasult is that virtually all concelled carry permit holders are white & minority applicants are disproportionately rejected.
But this isn't racism.
09-13-2004 | 12:55 PM
#47
VIP Member
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,709
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Car Info: CRZ EX-Navi/6MT & Vue Redline
Originally Posted by Oaf
But this isn't racism.
I'm about as white as can be, and living in California I have no more of a chance of owning one of the banned wepons than does anyone else. Period.-Chris
09-13-2004 | 02:54 PM
#48
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,312
From: UCIrvine
Car Info: '05 Crystal Grey Metallic WRX Sport Wagon
Assault weapons don't need to be illegal. What we should do is make carrying bullets out side of a shooting range or hunting area illegal. You have an M-16? No problem. You store it loaded or next to a box of rounds? Locked up for 30+ years. Then you NRA guys would say 'then how do I use it to protect myself?' Well, sorry to tell you, but pulling a gun on an intuder has never been proven to be safer than just calling the cops and waiting. And pulling out an assualt rifle at someone who is clearly in a more desperate situation than you can only wind up with you getting shot or the guy (or his family) sueing your a** for using excessive force. Yes, it does happen...one guy got sued because someone was breaking into his house and he fell through a skylight...so the homowner got f***ed just for having a skylight...imagine what would happen if you filled someone with rounds from an assault rifle...
09-13-2004 | 03:40 PM
#49
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 933
From: Sacramento
Car Info: Stock Legacy Turbo Wagon Silver
I don't know about you, but if someone breaks into my house I can assume that they are not there with good intent. I do not think that hiding in a closet with a phone for 8mins for the cops to show while my kids are sleeping in their beds is any sort of way to protect them. And yes it has been proven to be safer to protect yourself rather than waiting for your shining knight in a crown vic to show up. I have read of several documented cases where people have been on the phone with the police only to be killed by thier assailant.
Furthermore why should we need to depend on someone else to protect us when most people are perfectly capable of doing so themselves? Getting sued? Who cares as long as my family and I are safe. I can make more money but I can't replace my wife or kids, or my life for that matter. Do you really think that more laws are going to help us? Many have said it before and I will say it again, criminals do not care about laws, that is what makes them criminals.
"And pulling out an assualt rifle at someone who is clearly in a more desperate situation than you can only wind up with you getting shot or the guy (or his family) sueing your a** for using excessive force."
What situation is more desperate than fearing for the lives of your family and yourselff!!!!!!! It can also wind up with me shooting him and saving the lives of my family and I. Your position seems to be that we should not protect ourselves and that people attempting to protect themselves should be sent to prison for 30+ years!? Do you care about right and wrong or do you just not like gun owners?
Furthermore why should we need to depend on someone else to protect us when most people are perfectly capable of doing so themselves? Getting sued? Who cares as long as my family and I are safe. I can make more money but I can't replace my wife or kids, or my life for that matter. Do you really think that more laws are going to help us? Many have said it before and I will say it again, criminals do not care about laws, that is what makes them criminals.
"And pulling out an assualt rifle at someone who is clearly in a more desperate situation than you can only wind up with you getting shot or the guy (or his family) sueing your a** for using excessive force."
What situation is more desperate than fearing for the lives of your family and yourselff!!!!!!! It can also wind up with me shooting him and saving the lives of my family and I. Your position seems to be that we should not protect ourselves and that people attempting to protect themselves should be sent to prison for 30+ years!? Do you care about right and wrong or do you just not like gun owners?
Last edited by deyes; 09-13-2004 at 03:43 PM.
09-13-2004 | 03:45 PM
#50
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,494
From: Participating in some Anarchy!
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Originally Posted by MVWRX
Assault weapons don't need to be illegal. What we should do is make carrying bullets out side of a shooting range or hunting area illegal. You have an M-16? No problem. You store it loaded or next to a box of rounds? Locked up for 30+ years. Then you NRA guys would say 'then how do I use it to protect myself?' Well, sorry to tell you, but pulling a gun on an intuder has never been proven to be safer than just calling the cops and waiting. And pulling out an assualt rifle at someone who is clearly in a more desperate situation than you can only wind up with you getting shot or the guy (or his family) sueing your a** for using excessive force. Yes, it does happen...one guy got sued because someone was breaking into his house and he fell through a skylight...so the homowner got f***ed just for having a skylight...imagine what would happen if you filled someone with rounds from an assault rifle...
Read John Lott's book & get back to me.
09-13-2004 | 04:00 PM
#51
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,312
From: UCIrvine
Car Info: '05 Crystal Grey Metallic WRX Sport Wagon
I've read Lott's piece of crap...look at England, guns are illegal there and the capitol crime rate is WAY lower than ours...and no, no matter how hard I tried I could never take Helladumbs place, he's in a class of his own...I DO think that Americans are gun-crazy in general though...the whole constitutional thing as an excuss is hilarious...are YOU in a militia? I'm not...don't need a war gun...maybe a pistol, I could see that argument...get yourself a Glock model 21 or something like that, not an assault rifle...that's my point really...
09-13-2004 | 04:35 PM
#52
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,494
From: Participating in some Anarchy!
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
C'mon, M, give me more than that.
WHy do you consider Lott's work "crap"?
Is it because it goes against your beliefs?
Have you read any of the Federalist Papers?
Or any writings by any of the Founding Fathers pertaining to why the 2nd Ammendment is in the Bill of Rights?
The 2nd Ammendment has nothing to do with hunting or defense of home & family.
It's there to ensure that if/when the the time comes, you, MVWRX, can stand up against the Gov't.
But, anyway, back to your pent up frustrations.
What is the root of your irrational fear of "assault weapons"?
It's just an inaminate object, with no will of it's own.
A gun can only do what the operator makes it do.
WHy do you consider Lott's work "crap"?
Is it because it goes against your beliefs?
Have you read any of the Federalist Papers?
Or any writings by any of the Founding Fathers pertaining to why the 2nd Ammendment is in the Bill of Rights?
The 2nd Ammendment has nothing to do with hunting or defense of home & family.
It's there to ensure that if/when the the time comes, you, MVWRX, can stand up against the Gov't.
But, anyway, back to your pent up frustrations.
What is the root of your irrational fear of "assault weapons"?
It's just an inaminate object, with no will of it's own.
A gun can only do what the operator makes it do.
09-13-2004 | 04:45 PM
#53
250,000-mile Club President
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,770
From: Bizerkeley
Car Info: MBP 02 WRX wagon
Originally Posted by Oaf
It's there to ensure that if/when the the time comes, you, MVWRX, can stand up against the Gov't.
It was a nice idea back in the day, but the notion that "we the people" would stand any kind of chance taking arms against our government is simply not in touch with reality, we already live in a police state and thats only going to get worse, no matter what party is in charge.
Sorry, but I think that reading of the 2nd amendment lost all relevence about the time of the first world war.
Not saying I support gun control either mind you, just that some of the utterly silly arguments that some gun fetishists seem to come up with are getting to be downright hilarious.
09-13-2004 | 04:55 PM
#54
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,312
From: UCIrvine
Car Info: '05 Crystal Grey Metallic WRX Sport Wagon
It's not that I'm affraid of assault weapons...I just don't trust a lot of people who, if they had assault weapons, would scare the s*** out of me. It's not an irrational fear...on the contrary, the idea that every person has the right to whatever weapons they want is irrational. Where do you draw the line? Assault rifles are made to efficiently kill many people. So are bombs. Do you think every American should have the right to own some land mines and a couple ICBMs? It just doesn't make sense...assault rifles are overkill for hunting, and way overkill for self protection (unless you suddenly have 15-20 people that rush into your home hell-bent on killing you.) As for defense against the US Gov't? Give me a f***ing break...they'd shoot a self-sharpening-depleated-uranium shell from an Abrams tank cannon at my house and I'd be f***ing vapor if they were coming after me like that.
In my mind, it's difficult to justify the need to own an assault rifle. So give me a few reasons or situations where you need an assault rifle instead of another, more reasonable, firearm and maybe I'll see your point. But until then, I'll consider myself the rational one.
PS- Part of the reason Lott's book is crap is, in fact, my beliefs. That's why I think MienKompf is crap too. And the UNABombers manifesto too...beliefs are a good way to choose what you like and what you don't. But on top of that, Lott's book doesn't do a good job siteing any unbiased data (most of the %'s he shows in the book and in his OpEds don't even have footnotes for them), and reads more like rhetoric than most of the threads in this forum.
In my mind, it's difficult to justify the need to own an assault rifle. So give me a few reasons or situations where you need an assault rifle instead of another, more reasonable, firearm and maybe I'll see your point. But until then, I'll consider myself the rational one.
PS- Part of the reason Lott's book is crap is, in fact, my beliefs. That's why I think MienKompf is crap too. And the UNABombers manifesto too...beliefs are a good way to choose what you like and what you don't. But on top of that, Lott's book doesn't do a good job siteing any unbiased data (most of the %'s he shows in the book and in his OpEds don't even have footnotes for them), and reads more like rhetoric than most of the threads in this forum.
Last edited by MVWRX; 09-13-2004 at 05:05 PM.
09-13-2004 | 05:48 PM
#55
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 933
From: Sacramento
Car Info: Stock Legacy Turbo Wagon Silver
Originally Posted by MVWRX
I've read Lott's piece of crap...look at England, guns are illegal there and the capitol crime rate is WAY lower than ours...and no, no matter how hard I tried I could never take Helladumbs place, he's in a class of his own...I DO think that Americans are gun-crazy in general though...the whole constitutional thing as an excuss is hilarious...are YOU in a militia? I'm not...don't need a war gun...maybe a pistol, I could see that argument...get yourself a Glock model 21 or something like that, not an assault rifle...that's my point really...
<End rant>
09-13-2004 | 06:24 PM
#56
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 933
From: Sacramento
Car Info: Stock Legacy Turbo Wagon Silver
Originally Posted by MVWRX
It's not that I'm affraid of assault weapons...I just don't trust a lot of people who, if they had assault weapons, would scare the s*** out of me.
Originally Posted by MVWRX
It's not an irrational fear...on the contrary, the idea that every person has the right to whatever weapons they want is irrational. Where do you draw the line?
Originally Posted by MVWRX
Assault rifles are made to efficiently kill many people. So are bombs. Do you think every American should have the right to own some land mines and a couple ICBMs?
Originally Posted by MVWRX
It just doesn't make sense...assault rifles are overkill for hunting, .
Originally Posted by MVWRX
..and way overkill for self protection (unless you suddenly have 15-20 people that rush into your home hell-bent on killing you.)
Originally Posted by MVWRX
As for defense against the US Gov't? Give me a f***ing break...they'd shoot a self-sharpening-depleated-uranium shell from an Abrams tank cannon at my house and I'd be f***ing vapor if they were coming after me like that.
Originally Posted by MVWRX
In my mind, it's difficult to justify the need to own an assault rifle. So give me a few reasons or situations where you need an assault rifle instead of another, more reasonable, firearm and maybe I'll see your point. But until then, I'll consider myself the rational one.
Last edited by deyes; 09-13-2004 at 06:30 PM.
09-13-2004 | 06:37 PM
#57
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 933
From: Sacramento
Car Info: Stock Legacy Turbo Wagon Silver
Just an after thought, but when the founding fathers drafted the second ammendment the most advanced weapons being fielded were muzzle loading. That was state of the art back then, what is state of the art right now? Semi auto rifles and pistols. The point of the second ammendment was to ensure the right of Americans to own the sort of weapons (small arms) that are fielded by todays modern millitary. Otherwise a millitia would be much less effective against an invading army. There were no ICBM's or guided bombs or the like. Its obvious what our forefathers intentions were when they wrote it. That we can use these weapons to protect ourselves from criminals in our own country is not any kind of reason to be anti second ammendment. Its a good thing.
09-13-2004 | 08:08 PM
#58
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,494
From: Participating in some Anarchy!
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
[QUOTE=MVWRX]It's not that I'm affraid of assault weapons...I just don't trust a lot of people who, if they had assault weapons, would scare the s*** out of me. It's not an irrational fear...on the contrary, the idea that every person has the right to whatever weapons they want is irrational. [QUOTE=MVWRX]
OK. I agree with you; there are some people that shouldn't own firearms. And if all the pre '89 gun control laws had been strictly enforced, the Stockton, San Francisco, Columbine shootings may not have happened.
I can by whatever car I want, so why not any firearm? Am I more likely to kill some one with a Yugo or an STi?
The 2nd Ammendment is quite clear in that it only addresses personal weapons, not "crew served", hence these weapons are not protected by the 2nd, nor should they be.
They wouldn't waste that expesive a round on you, or me, for that matter.
Remember how Janet Reno "solved" the Waco problem; set a building on fire.
I want one.
Nothing irrational about that, right?
What is irrational, is a government that does not want me to have one.
Let me expand a bit.
My, our, government had absolutely no problem issuing me a brand new M16A2 assault rifle complete with bayonet lug, and flash suppessor & train me in it's proper usage to defend our country. They even gave me a bayonet and provided the necessary training so I could stick it into the body of some bastard trying to kill me.
Now this same government that gave me a machine gun & knife to defend said government with says I can't be trusted with a semi automatic rifle (that happens to look like a machine gun) to defend myself.
That's irrational.
I live in El Dorado county, far from others. I don't even know off the top of my head where the nearest Sherriff's office is, but can guess that response time would be longer than a few minutes.
Which is longer than I care to wait while worrying if the yutz that just B & E'd into my house is planning on taking my life or just valuables.
Could I defend myself with a pistol?
Yes.
But, I am proficiently trained on using an AR 15.
Don't get my wrong.
I don't answer the door with a pistol in hand.
Nor do I post videos on i-club of me and my friends shooting up the forest a la Brucelee.
I don't sit up at night, surrounded with firearms, waiting to smoke some bad guy.
To the contrary, I sleep very well, partly because I know I can protect my family.
OK. I agree with you; there are some people that shouldn't own firearms. And if all the pre '89 gun control laws had been strictly enforced, the Stockton, San Francisco, Columbine shootings may not have happened.
I can by whatever car I want, so why not any firearm? Am I more likely to kill some one with a Yugo or an STi?
Originally Posted by MVWRX
Where do you draw the line? Assault rifles are made to efficiently kill many people. So are bombs. Do you think every American should have the right to own some land mines and a couple ICBMs?
Originally Posted by MVWRX
It just doesn't make sense...assault rifles are overkill for hunting, and way overkill for self protection (unless you suddenly have 15-20 people that rush into your home hell-bent on killing you.) As for defense against the US Gov't? Give me a f***ing break...they'd shoot a self-sharpening-depleated-uranium shell from an Abrams tank cannon at my house and I'd be f***ing vapor if they were coming after me like that.
Remember how Janet Reno "solved" the Waco problem; set a building on fire.
Originally Posted by MVWRX
In my mind, it's difficult to justify the need to own an assault rifle. So give me a few reasons or situations where you need an assault rifle instead of another, more reasonable, firearm and maybe I'll see your point. But until then, I'll consider myself the rational one.
Nothing irrational about that, right?
What is irrational, is a government that does not want me to have one.
Let me expand a bit.
My, our, government had absolutely no problem issuing me a brand new M16A2 assault rifle complete with bayonet lug, and flash suppessor & train me in it's proper usage to defend our country. They even gave me a bayonet and provided the necessary training so I could stick it into the body of some bastard trying to kill me.
Now this same government that gave me a machine gun & knife to defend said government with says I can't be trusted with a semi automatic rifle (that happens to look like a machine gun) to defend myself.
That's irrational.
I live in El Dorado county, far from others. I don't even know off the top of my head where the nearest Sherriff's office is, but can guess that response time would be longer than a few minutes.
Which is longer than I care to wait while worrying if the yutz that just B & E'd into my house is planning on taking my life or just valuables.
Could I defend myself with a pistol?
Yes.
But, I am proficiently trained on using an AR 15.
Don't get my wrong.
I don't answer the door with a pistol in hand.
Nor do I post videos on i-club of me and my friends shooting up the forest a la Brucelee.
I don't sit up at night, surrounded with firearms, waiting to smoke some bad guy.
To the contrary, I sleep very well, partly because I know I can protect my family.
Last edited by FW Motorsports; 09-13-2004 at 08:13 PM.
