SUBSCRIBE | NEWSLETTERS | MAPS | VIDEOS | BLOGS | MARKETPLACE | CONTESTS
TRY BACKPACKER FREE!
SUBSCRIBE NOW and get
2 Free Issues and 3 Free Gifts!
Full Name:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email: (required)
If I like it and decide to continue, I'll pay just $12.00, and receive a full one-year subscription (9 issues in all), a 73% savings off the newsstand price! If for any reason I decide not to continue, I'll write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing.
Your subscription includes 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Or click here to pay now and get 2 extra issues
Offer valid in US only.


» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Page 1 of 512345>>

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: A conservative case for an assault weapons ban< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 1
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10734
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 20 2012, 11:22 pm  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

http://www.latimes.com/news....4.story

--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 2
Three Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1082
Joined: Dec. 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 12:00 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I would actually call it a poorly supported emotional case for banning legitimate firearms erroneously called assault weapons.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 3
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10734
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 12:07 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Then lay out your arguments why

If you attempt to make an argument use direct quotes from the article so we make sure you're
not using any strawman arguments

if you can't then it would be you using emotion

BTW I guess that other thread was deleted?


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 4
Three Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1082
Joined: Dec. 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 12:18 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Dennis The Menace @ Dec. 21 2012, 12:07 am)
QUOTE
Then lay out your arguments why

If you attempt to make an argument use direct quotes from the article so we make sure you're
not using any strawman arguments

if you can't then it would be you using emotion

BTW I guess that other thread was deleted?

I laid out the hunting and self defense reasons why the versatility of the  AR-15 makes it a useful firearm for the average gun owner in contrast to richer owners who can afford to buy many rifles, each tailored to a specific purpose.

This was in the intial thread about the tragedy at Newtown.

Do you know why that threat was deleted?

Regards.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 5
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10734
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 12:28 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

No I don't know why that was deleted

Where are the quotes from the article I linked in the first post? I didn't see you quote
from the article. I mean your initial response was about the article I linked to correct
and not just some generic reply based on the title? So rebut the arguments made by the author
that you made your initial statement about

Beyond that the issue are assault weapons(I understand you don't like that nomenclature
but I assume you understand what we are trying to refer to by the phrase) not specifically
one type of assault weapon such as the AR15. Also you say "a useful firearm for the average
gun owner"? Is that the issue here? Is that what we are debating? If they are useful?
Useful as defined by what criteria and how is that criteria relevant to the issue laid out
by the article?


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 6
Montecresto Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1874
Joined: Jul. 2012
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 9:22 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Three @ Dec. 21 2012, 12:00 am)
QUOTE
I would actually call it a poorly supported emotional case for banning legitimate firearms erroneously called assault weapons.

Exactly. These people keep pointing at Newtown, etc. and calling for reinstatement of AWB. These guns used, weren't on the ban. It's guns that millions of Americans use responsibly everyday that they want banned.

--------------
Killing one person is murder, killing a 100,000 is foreign policy
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 7
Montecresto Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1874
Joined: Jul. 2012
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 9:24 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Dennis The Menace @ Dec. 21 2012, 12:28 am)
QUOTE
No I don't know why that was deleted

Where are the quotes from the article I linked in the first post? I didn't see you quote
from the article. I mean your initial response was about the article I linked to correct
and not just some generic reply based on the title? So rebut the arguments made by the author
that you made your initial statement about

Beyond that the issue are assault weapons(I understand you don't like that nomenclature
but I assume you understand what we are trying to refer to by the phrase) not specifically
one type of assault weapon such as the AR15. Also you say "a useful firearm for the average
gun owner"? Is that the issue here? Is that what we are debating? If they are useful?
Useful as defined by what criteria and how is that criteria relevant to the issue laid out
by the article?

Stop using assault weapon and AR-15 in the same sentence. There's no connection. Are you ignorant of this fact, or willfully deceptive??

--------------
Killing one person is murder, killing a 100,000 is foreign policy
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 8
gunslinger Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6414
Joined: Mar. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 9:39 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Maybe this is a good reason for no further gun control:

http://www.infowars.com/communi....isarmed


--------------
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 9
kyle2193 Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4507
Joined: May 2008
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 10:18 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Do you know what the difference between a AR-15 and a Remington Model 7615 is? Cosmetics.

They are both semi auto, .223 rilfes that can accept large capacity magizines. One looks like a hunting rifle and one looks like military issue, but they are the same gun.

Anyway, the AWB really didn't do anything the first time around. Most of these guys don't use 'assult weapons', the two deadliest ones in history both used pistols.


What they do all have in common is a history of untreated mental illness. But hey, it is easier to write a law about guns so we can say we did something.


--------------
If I cannot swear in heaven I shall not stay there.
-Mark Twain
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 10
HighGravity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4656
Joined: Oct. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 10:31 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(gunslinger @ Dec. 21 2012, 9:39 am)
QUOTE
Maybe this is a good reason for no further gun control:

http://www.infowars.com/communi....isarmed

Ignoring the fact that this is a link to conspiracy nut fodder, what does elimination of all firearms have to do with showing
there should be "no further gun control"?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 11
HighGravity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4656
Joined: Oct. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 10:33 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(kyle2193 @ Dec. 21 2012, 10:18 am)
QUOTE
What they do all have in common is a history of untreated mental illness.

And easy access to firearms.  You guys keep leaving that part out.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 12
Land Rover Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6605
Joined: Sep. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 10:52 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(kyle2193 @ Dec. 21 2012, 10:18 am)
QUOTE
Do you know what the difference between a AR-15 and a Remington Model 7615 is? Cosmetics.

They are both semi auto, .223 rilfes that can accept large capacity magizines. One looks like a hunting rifle and one looks like military issue, but they are the same gun.

Anyway, the AWB really didn't do anything the first time around. Most of these guys don't use 'assult weapons', the two deadliest ones in history both used pistols.


What they do all have in common is a history of untreated mental illness. But hey, it is easier to write a law about guns so we can say we did something.

Well then how about making sure we don't riddle the next one with loopholes huh Kyle?

You remember, Government can do some stuff right?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 13
Three Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1082
Joined: Dec. 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 10:52 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Dennis The Menace @ Dec. 21 2012, 12:28 am)
QUOTE
No I don't know why that was deleted

Where are the quotes from the article I linked in the first post? I didn't see you quote
from the article. I mean your initial response was about the article I linked to correct
and not just some generic reply based on the title? So rebut the arguments made by the author
that you made your initial statement about

Beyond that the issue are assault weapons(I understand you don't like that nomenclature
but I assume you understand what we are trying to refer to by the phrase) not specifically
one type of assault weapon such as the AR15. Also you say "a useful firearm for the average
gun owner"? Is that the issue here? Is that what we are debating? If they are useful?
Useful as defined by what criteria and how is that criteria relevant to the issue laid out
by the article?

AR-15 because of its design characteristics and modularity (change components for different calibers and sighting options) is one of the most versatile firearms out there.

For home defense it is light and easy to shoot and hit with for even the relatively inexperience or those of small frame/many women.  It has less of a chance of overpenetrating and going thru multiple walls than even many handgun and shotgun loadings.   It also has advantages to someone living on rural properties or who may be a long way away from police response.

For hunting, with changes in components and thus calibers, it can be effectively and legally used on almost all game in N. America with the exception of bird hunting.

The design is inherently accurate and ammo is relatively cheap so it is widely used in target shooting competitions and shooting sports.

It is not just a murder's weapon, though any firearm can be used for the wrong purpose.

If you are really interested beyond just the debate, PM me.

Regards,
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 14
Land Rover Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6605
Joined: Sep. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 10:55 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

It's a better, more cost effective tool for killing things.

It appeals to the thrifty psychopaths out there.

Why take four guns to the elementary school Adam - when you only needed one to get the job done?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 15
HighGravity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4656
Joined: Oct. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 11:00 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Three @ Dec. 21 2012, 10:52 am)
QUOTE
AR-15 because of its design characteristics and modularity (change components for different calibers and sighting options) is one of the most versatile firearms out there.

For home defense it is light and easy to shoot and hit with for even the relatively inexperience or those of small frame/many women.  It has less of a chance of overpenetrating and going thru multiple walls than even many handgun and shotgun loadings.

And easily converted to a fully automatic weapon making it ideal for shooting up a theater full of people.

One of the Aurora killer's bullets went completely through the theater wall and hit a victim on the other side. But yeah, I'm sure there's little chance it will penetrate drywall and kill a neighbor accidentally.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 16
kyle2193 Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4507
Joined: May 2008
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 11:02 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(HighGravity @ Dec. 21 2012, 10:33 am)
QUOTE
And easy access to firearms.  You guys keep leaving that part out.

Even if we magically got rid of every gun in the world.

I still don't want to have people running around with untreated mental illness that think it is a good idea to kill CHILDREN. Because guess what they are going to do?

Realistically we are not going to limit access to guns in any meaningful way that would limit shootings. However, we can deal with the huge elephant in the room whenever we decide to.


--------------
If I cannot swear in heaven I shall not stay there.
-Mark Twain
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 17
Land Rover Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6605
Joined: Sep. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 11:05 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

The empty vessel that is conservative/libertarian ideology.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 18
HighGravity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4656
Joined: Oct. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 11:07 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

How clueless does one have to be to think it's easier to rid the world of mental illness than to enact tougher restrictions on access to guns?  Montecristo could never find an answer to my question but maybe you can. Why should the mentally ill be denied gun ownership but people who drink should not? More crimes are committed by drunks than the mentally ill.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 19
Three Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1082
Joined: Dec. 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 11:10 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(HighGravity @ Dec. 21 2012, 11:00 am)
QUOTE
But yeah, I'm sure there's little chance it will penetrate drywall and kill a neighbor accidentally.

Not saying little chance, but testing shows much less of a chance than most projectiles from many popular handguns, older style hunting rifles, or shotguns shooting buckhot.

Do you have data showing otherwise?

Cheers,
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 20
Three Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1082
Joined: Dec. 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 11:12 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Land Rover @ Dec. 21 2012, 10:55 am)
QUOTE
It's a better, more cost effective tool for killing things.

It appeals to the thrifty psychopaths out there.

Why take four guns to the elementary school Adam - when you only needed one to get the job done?

LR,

Would you care to factually and rationally refute the points I made in my post?

Regards,
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 21
HighGravity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4656
Joined: Oct. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 11:15 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Three @ Dec. 21 2012, 11:10 am)
QUOTE

(HighGravity @ Dec. 21 2012, 11:00 am)
QUOTE
But yeah, I'm sure there's little chance it will penetrate drywall and kill a neighbor accidentally.

Not saying little chance, but testing shows much less of a chance than most projectiles from many popular handguns, older style hunting rifles, or shotguns shooting buckhot.

Do you have data showing otherwise?

Cheers,

You don't seem to realize you just completely defeated your own argument. The fact that there are more dangerous handguns out there than a weapon of choice of mass murderers, demonstrates just how absurd it is that people have these things hiding under their pillows.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 22
kyle2193 Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4507
Joined: May 2008
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 11:25 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(HighGravity @ Dec. 21 2012, 11:07 am)
QUOTE
Why should the mentally ill be denied gun ownership but people who drink should not?

Did I say deny gun ownership to the mentally ill?

--------------
If I cannot swear in heaven I shall not stay there.
-Mark Twain
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 23
HighGravity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4656
Joined: Oct. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 11:26 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(kyle2193 @ Dec. 21 2012, 11:25 am)
QUOTE

(HighGravity @ Dec. 21 2012, 11:07 am)
QUOTE
Why should the mentally ill be denied gun ownership but people who drink should not?

Did I say deny gun ownership to the mentally ill?

You going to pretend that's not what you were promoting in your last post? Okay. Whatever works. Seems like it'd be easier to admit you said something you didn't really think through clearly than to change tune midstream.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 24
gunslinger Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6414
Joined: Mar. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 12:53 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Land Rover @ Dec. 21 2012, 10:55 am)
QUOTE
It's a better, more cost effective tool for killing things.

It appeals to the thrifty psychopaths out there.

Why take four guns to the elementary school Adam - when you only needed one to get the job done?

Still not near efficient enough for many...

Hitler
Stalin
Mao
Pol-Pot
Timothy McViegh

Just to name a few.

No assault rifles at Colombine.....or Virginia Tech.   Evil didn't need them.

Ban rifles or magazines and evil will still be there and every bit as efficient.

What part of this don't you understand?


--------------
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 25
HighGravity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4656
Joined: Oct. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 12:56 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

People were assaulted by someone using weapons but they weren't assault weapons. Great logic.

All you've done with those two references is demonstrate more weapons need to be labelled as assault weapons. Do you people ever think before you post?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 26
gunslinger Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6414
Joined: Mar. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 1:20 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(HighGravity @ Dec. 21 2012, 12:56 pm)
QUOTE
People were assaulted by someone using weapons but they weren't assault weapons. Great logic.

All you've done with those two references is demonstrate more weapons need to be labelled as assault weapons. Do you people ever think before you post?

Which is why you've proven the point that liberals won't be happy until all the firearms are gone.

Now, deny the agenda....


--------------
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 27
hiking_tiger Search for posts by this member.
sekk, plyndre, og deretter brenne
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4858
Joined: Oct. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 1:28 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Three @ Dec. 21 2012, 9:52 am)
QUOTE

(Dennis The Menace @ Dec. 21 2012, 12:28 am)
QUOTE
No I don't know why that was deleted

Where are the quotes from the article I linked in the first post? I didn't see you quote
from the article. I mean your initial response was about the article I linked to correct
and not just some generic reply based on the title? So rebut the arguments made by the author
that you made your initial statement about

Beyond that the issue are assault weapons(I understand you don't like that nomenclature
but I assume you understand what we are trying to refer to by the phrase) not specifically
one type of assault weapon such as the AR15. Also you say "a useful firearm for the average
gun owner"? Is that the issue here? Is that what we are debating? If they are useful?
Useful as defined by what criteria and how is that criteria relevant to the issue laid out
by the article?

AR-15 because of its design characteristics and modularity (change components for different calibers and sighting options) is one of the most versatile firearms out there.

For home defense it is light and easy to shoot and hit with for even the relatively inexperience or those of small frame/many women.  It has less of a chance of overpenetrating and going thru multiple walls than even many handgun and shotgun loadings.   It also has advantages to someone living on rural properties or who may be a long way away from police response.

For hunting, with changes in components and thus calibers, it can be effectively and legally used on almost all game in N. America with the exception of bird hunting.

The design is inherently accurate and ammo is relatively cheap so it is widely used in target shooting competitions and shooting sports.

It is not just a murder's weapon, though any firearm can be used for the wrong purpose.

If you are really interested beyond just the debate, PM me.

Regards,

This is where I am.  Who cares what the frame is that the projectile is launched from?  Is the AR-15 more "assaultish" than something else?  No.

I could go in for a limit on magazine capacity, but see no reason to ban one style of weapon over another.  The latter gets you onto the slope where an elk rifle might be considered a sniper rifle and banned.


--------------
“Sometimes you have to be ready to receive the information before it can take hold.” – C. Schwarz

“When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.” – Attributed to the Buddhism tradition…
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 28
kyle2193 Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4507
Joined: May 2008
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 2:30 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(HighGravity @ Dec. 21 2012, 11:26 am)
QUOTE

(kyle2193 @ Dec. 21 2012, 11:25 am)
QUOTE

(HighGravity @ Dec. 21 2012, 11:07 am)
QUOTE
Why should the mentally ill be denied gun ownership but people who drink should not?

Did I say deny gun ownership to the mentally ill?

You going to pretend that's not what you were promoting in your last post? Okay. Whatever works. Seems like it'd be easier to admit you said something you didn't really think through clearly than to change tune midstream.

You are free to check my post history, the problem is squarely mental illness and I've voiced it as such. Limiting gun access to the mentally ill won't work for a slew of reasons, including you can develop an illness after you legally purchace a firearm.

What we can do is work towards treating the illness before they get to the point where shooting people seems like a good idea.

It is better for society in more ways than just the reduction of mass shootings and would be more effective.


--------------
If I cannot swear in heaven I shall not stay there.
-Mark Twain
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 29
wwwest Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6763
Joined: Dec. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 2:38 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

The Judge made many good points, the same ones that have been voiced in the threads here.

We need to take serious steps to make guns less deadly, and we need to start now.

The NRA has missed a great oppotunity to get on the side sanity and growing public opinion, by sponsoring technical improvements to all guns that would make tthem inoperable to all but the registered and licensed owner.

Not a big surprise, just one more obvious oppotunity squandered.


--------------
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

- John Kenneth Galbraith
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 30
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10734
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Dec. 21 2012, 2:40 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Montecresto @ Dec. 21 2012, 9:24 am)
QUOTE

(Dennis The Menace @ Dec. 21 2012, 12:28 am)
QUOTE
No I don't know why that was deleted

Where are the quotes from the article I linked in the first post? I didn't see you quote
from the article. I mean your initial response was about the article I linked to correct
and not just some generic reply based on the title? So rebut the arguments made by the author
that you made your initial statement about

Beyond that the issue are assault weapons(I understand you don't like that nomenclature
but I assume you understand what we are trying to refer to by the phrase) not specifically
one type of assault weapon such as the AR15. Also you say "a useful firearm for the average
gun owner"? Is that the issue here? Is that what we are debating? If they are useful?
Useful as defined by what criteria and how is that criteria relevant to the issue laid out
by the article?

Stop using assault weapon and AR-15 in the same sentence. There's no connection. Are you ignorant of this fact, or willfully deceptive??

Do you have reading comprehension problem?

WTF didn't you understand about when I said 'I understand you don't like that nomenclature but
I assume you understand what we are trying to refer to by the phrase"?

Now are people like you going to have a pissing match because I used the term "assault
weapon" to divert the issue at hand?

Added:

Its especially anidiotic response from you because the title of the thread is about
'assault weapons' not AR15s. Oh but then you ask why did I bring up AR15s then? Because
Three brought it up first. So the guy that you responded positively to in your post 6
actually did the conflating first. So if you have a problem with someone conflating an AR15
with an 'assault weapon' then take it up with three who responded with the AR15 example when
the topic was on 'assault weapons'(the clear implication is that Three considers an AR15 and
'assault weapons')


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
122 replies since Dec. 20 2012, 11:22 pm < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


Page 1 of 512345>>
reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply A conservative case for an assault weapons ban
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code



Get 2 FREE Trial Issues and 3 FREE GIFTS
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
The Best Trails in America
YES! Please send me my FREE trial issues of Backpacker
and my 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Full Name:
City:
Address 1:
Zip Code:
State:
Address 2:
Email (required):
Free trial offer valid for US subscribers only. Canadian subscriptions | International subscriptions