cc4usmc

Sounds like he was teaching him a lesson the good ol' American way. If the other guy hadn't tried to mug him in the first place, he'd still have his Air Force 1's. What would you have him do? Slap the guy on the wrist? Oh wait.. that would be assault...

ESmorz

I was just making sure I wasn't going crazy.

__________________

violentrunning.squidd.org/news

Phatz

About the CL posting....

We CA people have to remember gun laws are different in other states. In AZ you can walk around with a pistol on your hip like its the wild west. In some states you can obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon I believe, not sure about that one tho.

.. anyways, Ill bet its a fake, some kid for sure... and if its not, I hope the guy wasn't dumb enough to leave his real info.

AS far as gun control and AW....

This country was founded and liberated by the protection of the minute men at the will and finance of a bunch of rich fucks who didn't want to pay taxes anymore. That is why the right to bear arms is in the fundamental Bill of Rights.

I understand having a 9mm in case some fool breaks into your house. You better be carefull where those bullets fly tho and not hit someone through a wall or window. My ex's dad shot a burglar with a magnum in his house. when the cops showed up they asked, "why didn't you finish him off?"

But with the advancement and protection of todays US Army do we still need to have stockpiles of guns or AWs in our homes and neighborhoods? In case the redcoats are coming? Rr from ze Germans, Tommy? Maybe, considering so many of our forces are wrapped up in foreign affairs that the even National Guard was deployed from the Nation it's suppost to protect.

At the current state, an enemy would never lead a successful land war in the US because every gun toting citizen would love the chance to dust off their rifles and unload rounds on some fucks trying to invade our shit! And that is why terrorist blow up our buildings and kill innocents instead.

I know my best friends dad around the corner, a retired sherif, has a locked closet with enough firepower to overthrow the city. Thats where I would run if the shits going down.

But does that justify the sale and ownerships of AW to citizens? Or just normal weapons?

__________________

jskateborders

The whole basis of the country is that everyone is a citizen, at equal level, president, police, military, ect. Thats the whole point of "citizens arrests" (which dont work btw). That means that no one should have rights to carry a weapon someone else does not.

__________________
"I am Norwegian, and are not familiar with your urban words :P"

98s14inaz

I'm going to say my part and back out of this conversation slowly, I hate these things. When the constitution was written the government and the people had equal firepower, the musket was the weapon everyone used. The founding fathers believed that everyone should have one so that if the government got out of hand again the people would have the means to defend themselves against tyranny. The final check and balance if you will.

The same holds true today. The assault rifle is the weapon of the government, so the people should have equal weapons...just in case. We still out number them. I pray to God it never comes to that, I would never want to kill an American. Why do you think our government is so dead set on taking away our arms? Why do all the statistics show that most firearm related murders are with unregistered weapons and not assault rifles? Why do all the gun grabbing politicians (including Ted Kennedy) have security with full auto weapons guarding them 24/7?

Question authority Remember, an unarmed citizen is a subject.

__________________
Suck my balls 8====D (You are here, you know who you are)

jskateborders

Wow, you said that much better than I did, but EXACTLY!

__________________
"I am Norwegian, and are not familiar with your urban words :P"

98s14inaz

I'm a social studies teacher lol

__________________
Suck my balls 8====D (You are here, you know who you are)

SHIFT_*grind*

YES.

"THIS. Is a shotgun, Sol." "It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!"

HalveBlue

True.

BUT...

The government also has supersonic jets, aircraft carriers, cruise missiles, and nuclear weapons. Do you advocate private citizens be allowed access to those in the name of keeping the government in check?

It's one of the obvious pitfalls of a document that was written over two centuries ago.

Besides, what good are weapons if people aren't willing to use them?

After all, for all those people complaining about the government infringing upon, taking away, their rights, how many are actually taking a stand and using their weapons to combat this government tyranny?

The government doesn't need to take away the peoples' weapons. It just need to take away their will to fight.

That's not to say I don't support the rights of the people to own guns. I do.

I just think the "gun issue" tends to be dominated by hyperbole and theories; on both sides.

Just a little food for thought.

98s14inaz

That is a typical left wing liberal response ^ I'll lose my will to fight tyranny about the same time I stop breathing. If you think our government wouldn't turn on us to save itself you are ignorant. Read up on the hurricane in NO and how the people were disarmed and not allowed to defend themselves or their businesses against looters etc. This is a slippery slope, I feel every law abiding American should own a gun...just in case. I'd rather have one and not need it than need one and not have it.

__________________
Suck my balls 8====D (You are here, you know who you are)

VROOOM

everyone should have a gun in case the govt trys to attack us? we have the strongest military in the world and you think us citizens could take them down? that would be a joke.
if the govt wanted to take over they would assault weapons or not.

__________________

98s14inaz

At the time the British had the most powerful military in the world...how did that revolution end up?

How is the most powerful military in the world faring in Iraq and Afghanistan? We have a never ending battle on our hands, not bad for a bunch of civilians with a cause and assault rifles.

__________________
Suck my balls 8====D (You are here, you know who you are)

VROOOM

at the time of the revolutionary war the military and civilians used the same weapons. the military used rifles maybe at the most they had a gatling gun, they didnt have tanks, jets or nuclear weapons. if our army was made up of just assault weapons then yeah we stand a chance.

the Iraqis have more than just assault weapons, are trained to fight they are also funded by terroists. in iraq we have to worry about killing civilians. if the govt was taking over the country do you think they would care if they killed civilians. hell no.

__________________

ESmorz

__________________

violentrunning.squidd.org/news

98s14inaz

Gattling gun was not developed until the 1860's. If all those kick ass weapons are so effective why are we still in Iraq and Afghanistan? Those rag heads are using technology from before the cold war. All I hear is "blah blah blah I'm a dirty liberal" lol

__________________
Suck my balls 8====D (You are here, you know who you are)

VROOOM

because thats all you want to hear

__________________

murda-c

lol raghead is an ethnic slur.

__________________

jskateborders

Technically not if they actually do have a rag on their head....
But what would make the government want to take weapons away from law abiding citizens hmmm? Because we are a threat to them. The government is supposed to fear its people, not the other way around (yes, v for vendetta, but true). That keeps things fair. As long as the are afraid of an uprising or revolt, they will give us what we as a people want (which is democracy btw, you know, what the country is founded on). But if we dont have any weapons, they dont have any fear, if fact, we become afraid of them, and then, they dont care what we want. If they said no more elections tommorow, you'd better believe a shitload of armed rednecks would march into washington by sunday. If we didnt have guns and they said no more elections? "thats not right" is pretty much all we'd be able to do.

__________________
"I am Norwegian, and are not familiar with your urban words :P"

Tearlessj

YouTube - Bringing In the New Year With a Bang!!! AR-15 style

Actually going shooting Saturday.

__________________
Nagasaki Motors
Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.

jyon9689

That's CALIFORNIA, they'll attempt to outlaw anything. Yet medical marijuana is legal. That's not the best state to use as an example for something being outlawed without proper cause.

I DO believe that hunting with firearms will never be be in danger of being outlawed, given plentiful game. It's too deeply rooted as an American past time. I never said sportsmen like myself are protected by the 2A, only that the government wouldn't keep us from hunting with guns.

You don't seem to get the point that I'm not for an AWB. It's just not that big of a deal to me. I enjoy hunting, and an AWB isn't going to affect that. It might mean I can't buy anymore "assault" weapons, but that's not enough to affect my choice in presidential candidates.

Mis-informed? No. People love to pull up voting records, but this is American politics. Anyone can find descrepancies in voting records. Legislature is not a clear-cut or efficient process. I'm not defending Obama by saying that. It's just the nature of the system.

I felt he'd be a better candidate. That's why I voted for him. It was either him or McCain, and I damn sure wasn't going to vote the dismal Repub. ticket we had on the ballot this year.

On that note, you have made a few good points. I respect the fact that you call out both candidates though. I can't understand why so-called Republicans were so quick to accept McCain.

Not to get off topic though, I do not think that an AWB would neccessarily decrease crime, and I do support concealed carry. I just don't think that an AWB is such a huge issue as to affect who someone should vote for, but then again I guess that's for individuals to decide.

Matej

You sound more like a socialist studies teacher.

Oh snap oh snap.

Sizzle sizzle.




If the government ever decides to turn against the citizens, they'll outlaw weapons long before that, long before anyone even sees anything coming. The US government operates on shady moves behind the curtain, by taunting and sicking its "enemies" against each other through diplomacy, and always waiting for someone to slip up and fall so they can walk over them.

jskateborders

Thats pretty much the whole point of everything he and I have said....

__________________
"I am Norwegian, and are not familiar with your urban words :P"

HalveBlue

Whatever, bro. You keep believing what you want.

Fact is, the federal government has enacted a series of legislation limiting and regulating access to firearms by private citizens. This, according to many people in the pro-gun lobby, is an egregious violation of the Constitution.

I'm still waiting on these people to exercise their 2nd Amendment Right and combat this terrible government tyranny.



I'm not opposed to gun ownership. But I'm not blind either. Gun crime and accidents are a huge public health issue in the States, whether you want to admit it or not.

Instead of having a sensible public discourse on the topic, the issue is almost always derailed by exaggerated hypotheses and paranoid delusions.

P.S. Public participation in government is a much better way to keep the government in check than an armed populace.

98s14inaz

I'm not your bro. The statistics say otherwise. Most gun crimes are done with unregistered "illegal" weapons. The criminals will always have guns no matter how much restriction the libs lay down. Crime actually went down in DC once the citizens were allowed to defend themselves again, look up that statistic. In fact crime goes down pretty much any place that gun ownership is encouraged. Crime also goes up in areas where guns are suppressed...England, Australia, etc.

Nothing violent is going to happen until the system breaks down and the majority of the population is effected. Talking to those in power never works unless you can back it up with lots of money. When the colonies "talked" with the king of England he laughed and raised taxes, quartered soldiers in their homes, etc. This awb nonsense is more of an inconvenience, baby step if you will at this point. I know for a fact that the people in NO were pissed when the soldiers/police went door to door taking the firearms away..."don't worry, we'll protect you" lmfao. Imagine that on a larger scale. Just like an animal, the population won't get fed up until they are backed into a corner with no other options. Again, I pray it never comes to that.

We put up with the British for a very long time, then we reached our breaking point and had a revolution...the rest is history.

"those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who didn't"

I don't see how any of what I am saying is "paranoid", "delusional", or based on theory. History repeats itself, that is a fact. I'm stating actual factual points in history. This is exactly why I hate these conversations, no matter how much sense I make the liberals run around like the sky is falling. I'm done, have at it

__________________
Suck my balls 8====D (You are here, you know who you are)

jyon9689

It seems like it's the people who are pitching a hissie-fit over a POTENTIAL AWB are the ones that think the sky is falling. Just listen to what some of the above people are saying. Conspiracy threories and all... And why target liberals, shouldn't you be targeting people who actually have a certain opinion on this issue that you care so much about? If you cut it out with all that die-hard Red vs. Blue shit, people will take you a lot more seriously.

I probably own more guns than most anyone in this thread, and hang out with A LOT of right-wingers. From a completely objective standpoint, Republicans misunderstand the whole 2A issue just as much as some far-leftists.

These conversations do tend to go in cirlcles haha.

EDIT: I just ordered my Doublestar AR-15 stripped lower, $90. If anyone really is paranoid about an upcoming ban, go buy yours. Can't beat that price, with all this people rushing out to buy up all the guns.

fckillerbee

wow...I don't even know where to start with what I would like to add my 2 .

I agree and disagree about this move. I agree that people should be able to go out and buy an assault rifle for personal use, I dont think it should be a matter of walking into a store and just buying one. And are you serious? " we should be able to buy anything without having to have background checks and what not" I understand personal space....and your rights. but what about mine?

what about the woman who put her husband in jail cause he beats her, and he said "your dead when I come out"...he should be able to walk to the nearest gun shop and pick one up...no registration...no background check..go ahead and murder someones mother, daughter, whatever. serious...think about it.

Taking away assault rifles? yes..we had the thing in LA 12 years ago. cho shot his wife and kids with a handgun. if people want to kill people...they will do it in any means necessary.

drunk drivers kill people too...where's the ban on alcohal? oh we tried that and it didn't work. so what do they do for people who have too many dui's? put a breatalizer test in their steering wheel before they start the car. it'll save a life..why don't we think of trying that route with weapons? find a way to prevent the possibility.

Imagine if 12 years ago...everyone in that bank had a handgun. there were 2 dudes. that's 30 people with a handgun, and 2 guys with full armor. and ak's....umm..reload...BAAAAM. there goes 2 guys trying to kill people. FUCK!!! THANK GOD no one was killed other than them. but there were many police officers gunned down...if they died would you be more against assault rifles...probably. "what if" is a huge question.

shit...give everyone a gun. If I were a robber knowing that this dude had a gun...fuck...I would have a second thought about robbing them. that's the hunter being afraid of the hunted.

how about this...up security for illegal weapons traffic, every person that has to purchase a gun...also has to take classes on safety, and precaution, as well as a damn insanity test. Whats the intent of having the weapon...oh, for display..why do you need bullets. I guarantee if you make it a longer and harder process to go out and buy a weapon to kill someone, there will be less people buying guns. they will say fuck it and get a knife. that's umm...a lot of time to run compared to being shot and that's it. giving us a better chance at living.

Cho was a mentally instable person. no one thought he was crazy. wife..kids...everything was fine. if it were a longer process for him to purchase a handgun, maybe that instable 2-3 weeks of him thinking about killing his family would change. you never know. what if right.
(cho worked for the same company I did.....people saw him getting depressed before he bought the gun. what if they investigated people to that extent? hmmmm.... we can deny a federal agent cause a teacher said he was bad at age 6, yet we check what...criminal records? so you're buying the gun for security, yet your crazy...mk...heres a "stun gun" works for 5 seconds at a time. wont kill someone. you pull that out and fire it off. have fun...your safe. no ones dead...hopefully. can't kill 5 people.

With that said..do you honestly think we are outlawing assault rifles cause they are "assault" rifels. c'mon...our country knows what they are doing. Get too many crazy people in office, next thing you know you have another hitler....smart person bad intentions. you know how many people I know that I have joking around said fuck obama, and they get super personal as if i'm attacking them. could this be a beggining..haha jk. people...i vote for obama, and I'm republican.
(here comes the conspiracy comments...)

I think this is the wrong route for the US if they are honestly trying to lower death rate by weapons.

__________________

ka24de....them 18's is spinnin...they spinnen...

jskateborders

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government."
Patrick Henry
/thread

__________________
"I am Norwegian, and are not familiar with your urban words :P"

98s14inaz

SHHHHHHHH, keep your voice down while the grown ups are talking. How am I promoting socialism? I am for smaller government, pretty much everything I have said supports smaller govt

Brilliant quote. I forgot about that one.

__________________
Suck my balls 8====D (You are here, you know who you are)

OptionZero

An uneducated citizen is a subject.

With or without "assault weapons," what are you gonna do? Go rambo on cops, national guard, and military forces? Please.

"citizens should have the same weapons as the government?" You want a F-22 parked in everyone's drive way?

This is not the 18th century. If you don't like the government, no weapon is going to change your mind or the way the government is run.

Get an education, be active in politics and your community. . . be a true citizen, not a relic from the past.

As for gun control generally, KA24DEEEESSONETHREE and I hashed the entire argument out already. Dig up the thread and read it.

In summary, however:

Guns are a tool, nothing more and nothing less. They are not inherently good or evil, they are merely ridiculously effective at what they do. What they do is kill or seriously injured.

Government regulation of assault weapons is no different than government regulation of anything else, whether its cars, chemicals, or even other consumer goods with any sort of potency, all the way down to food that can cause health problems.

Ironically, people that resist any form of "gun control" typically assert that those imposing the "gun control" are irrationally scared of guns as some sort of magically, evil force. Yet by fighting so vehemently to defend the "right to bear arms," pro-gun ownership groups themselves are placing a mystical quality upon guns as well, because they believe guns represent a form of independence and self-governance.

Guns no longer do. Our society is far denser and pluralistic; our guns are too good at what they do. It is a different world.

While gun regulation/legislation is NOT THE ENTIRE SOLUTION to violence in our society . . . it is certainly not the sign of the end individual rights and beginning of fascism that so many in this thread seem to think.

No gun is going to protect you from Big Brother; no one's going to keep an automatic weapon under the bed for self-defense. Even a police station has their most potent weapons locked away in an armory until needed.

Comprehensive gun laws combined with consistent and effective enforcement of them is what we need. Loopholes in laws and lax enforcement (primarily in the gun shows arena) is what allows illegal weapons to filter in society, and eventually, into the hands of evil people.

Guns don't kill people, true . . . but dumbasses use guns to kill people. At least without a gun the dumbass will have to get his hands dirty.


To the conspiracy theorists who live in fear of impending, unprovoked government intrusions . . . stop. I have worked in pretty much every facet of state government - trust me, it's far more interesting productive to learn how the government works and see how it can be improved than to bitch about it from behind a computer. If you're so worried, get involved and make a difference. It can be a simple as volunteering at a public school or local community center or as hard as getting a law degree writing new legislation/regulations. Whatever you choose, it's far better than moaning about what you've never participated in or studied.

__________________


FOR SALE: pair of SSR Professor SP1 - 17x9.0, +6; 5x114.3

OptionZero

Like all short quotes, that remark is taken out of context and sounds better than it's actual meaning is accurate.

The Constitution was written out of the recognition that the government is made up of people, of citizens.

As a result, the Founding Fathers wrote numerous safeguards into the very structure of the federal government so that it could not be turned into a overbearing force by those within it. Why do you think we have three branches of government with a system of checks and balances? Why do you think we have an electoral college instead of direct voting?

The small group of people who created this country did not fear "government" - they feared PEOPLE . . . people who were too stupid, too reactionary, too selfish to be entrusted with a government that could effect swift change and exert too much power.

Nothing is more pathetic than taking potshots at "the goverment this" or "the government that."

May I ask what you do? How have you ever participated in YOUR government, if at all? Do you know how it runs? Have you tried to learn? Have you ever served in any capacity? Major in political science? Anything? If not, sir, I ask what right do you have to mock it? If you're going to just be an irrelevant pebble content to be swept away, then at least shut the fuck up.

__________________


FOR SALE: pair of SSR Professor SP1 - 17x9.0, +6; 5x114.3