New Year - same thought about guns.

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
My man, YOU wrote, "Not sure what you mean". How am I condescending? That was NOT my intention.

And FYI, a condescending attitude can be had by anyone....even arrogant assholes. >Got'cha!<

Sure, play it that way: you're the all wise Liberal and I'm just an idiot in Texas. Now guess who I'm voting for in 2024. LOL

I'm guessing Biden won't be on the ticket. It'll be a Free-for-All election favoring the Republicans.

Funny how you declare a narrative where I never said or implied such things.

Man, you are sore loser, ain't ya now? I got'cha on a small point. Deal with or carry on like a petulant child. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

The OP stands as a valid proposal and premise. I'm not going down this detour with you. See ya next time.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Funny how you declare a narrative where I never said or implied such things....

There ya go again blaming me.

Text is a poor form of communication. 90% of conflicts are miscommunication. You blame me for not understanding your post. Sun Tzu would be disappointed in you. LOL

https://titusng.com/2013/03/04/the-test-of-sun-tzus-art-of-war-on-concubines/
Sun Tzu said: “If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame.”

 

[SmarterthanYou]

That old lie has been parroted for years by LaPierre style NRA sycophants. No proposal or law in the last 40 years has included or lead to confiscation of weapons legally obtained by law abiding citizens. If you have valid concrete proof to the contrary, please present it. If not, then your last sentence is also a lie.

as has been posted several times in the past, of which most of you ignorant leftists choose to ignore, simply look up the history of Californias 'Roberti-Roos' act and the resulting confiscation that occurred thereafter. See, the wordsmithing you traitors like to use does not invalidate the lies you tell about no proposals or laws to confiscate........

 

[Street Glider]

Also ask yourself this; why did the previously banned AR-15 style weapons fly off the shelves the second the ban was lifted when these other weapons were available? I have yet to get a straight answer from gunners like yourself. I'll wait.

Why would I entertain the idea of answering your question when you didn't answer mine.

Why was the AR-15 on the AWB list but the Mini 14 was not?

I'll wait...

 

[Street Glider]

No, it's your convoluted logic based on denial of historically documented facts coupled with your opinion, supposition and conjecture.

Pointing out a registration system that can help curtail criminal activity is NOT confiscation from law abiding citizens. Bringing back a law that kept the weapons most used in recent mass shootings is not a bad thing (at least not to sane, rational and mature folk anyway).

I am a law abiding gun owner. I own semi-automatic handguns, shotguns, AR-15's, revolvers, hunting rifles, etc. None of them are registered.

How would requiring me to register my guns curtail criminal activity?

"I'll wait"...

 

[Rune]

Endless possibilities

Wrong dumb bitch.
First you would need to change the nature of criminals so that they will obey laws.

 

[evince]

Wrong dumb bitch.
First you would need to change the nature of criminals so that they will obey laws.

What a merry little creature you are



Did you realize you spew didn’t limit the possibilities I spoke of

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
That old lie has been parroted for years by LaPierre style NRA sycophants. No proposal or law in the last 40 years has included or lead to confiscation of weapons legally obtained by law abiding citizens. If you have valid concrete proof to the contrary, please present it. If not, then your last sentence is also a lie.

as has been posted several times in the past, of which most of you ignorant leftists choose to ignore, simply look up the history of Californias 'Roberti-Roos' act and the resulting confiscation that occurred thereafter. See, the wordsmithing you traitors like to use does not invalidate the lies you tell about no proposals or laws to confiscate........

You seem to have a serious reading comprehension problem. For your education:

The Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989 became law on January 1, 1990. It established the "assault weapon" as a new classification of firearms, and prohibited anyone from buying them without a special permit. Those who already owned a firearm deemed an assault weapon were able to keep it.


https://www.kpcc.org/2015-12-31/faq-the-california-assault-weapons-ban

Now, all YOU have to do is provide VALID, DOCUMENTED PROOF that legally purchased weapons under the law were confiscated by the state. If you can't do this, then you're just blowing smoke and wasting time.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Why would I entertain the idea of answering your question when you didn't answer mine.

Why was the AR-15 on the AWB list but the Mini 14 was not?

I'll wait...

You’d have to make the Mini-14 look scarier.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Also ask yourself this; why did the previously banned AR-15 style weapons fly off the shelves the second the ban was lifted when these other weapons were available? I have yet to get a straight answer from gunners like yourself. I'll wait.

Why would I entertain the idea of answering your question when you didn't answer mine.

Why was the AR-15 on the AWB list but the Mini 14 was not?

I'll wait...

Okay, let's try it again.

I stated in no uncertain terms that the 1994 AWB list was a COMPROMISE with the gun lobby. I also stated that gunners like you are constantly harping about weapons that weren't on the list but were (in your opinion) just as good if not better than the AR-15. It's well to remember that there were those who complained that the list didn't cover enough weapons (like the Mini 14 you mention).

It comes town to a matter of opinion, assessment and compromise. Not everyone was happy with the list (pro and con), but they could live with it. Capice?

Now, are you going to answer my question or just continue to stall or dodge or obfuscate? I'll wait again.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
No, it's your convoluted logic based on denial of historically documented facts coupled with your opinion, supposition and conjecture.

Pointing out a registration system that can help curtail criminal activity is NOT confiscation from law abiding citizens. Bringing back a law that kept the weapons most used in recent mass shootings is not a bad thing (at least not to sane, rational and mature folk anyway).

I am a law abiding gun owner. I own semi-automatic handguns, shotguns, AR-15's, revolvers, hunting rifles, etc. None of them are registered.

How would requiring me to register my guns curtail criminal activity?

"I'll wait"...

your wait is over.

But you do have bill of sale/receipts for those purchases. And the 1994 AWB ban sunset in 2004. None of the weapons mentioned are full auto, of which you would need a special license for.

I point these things out because if you decide to sell these weapons and they are used in the committing of a crime, the cops can point to the new owner and not YOU when they do their trace in an investigation. Same thing if they are stolen. And if a new version of the 1994 AWB is passed, you have proof that you are not breaking any laws by possessing them.

Capice? Good.

 

[Taichiliberal]

You’d have to make the Mini-14 look scarier.

Mostly superficial?

What are you leaving out? And remember, the "superficial" differences you do mention are designed for the military field for a more efficient, quicker, accurate firing...something the military looks for in a weapon. Hunters (beyond a telescope) normally don't need the superficial differences (at least not the ones of my grandfather's/father's day).

The OP proposal stands valid. It's no threat to your ability to own a gun. Bringing back a version of the 1994 AWB won't kill you, or deny you ample fire power for hunting or defense.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Mostly superficial?

What are you leaving out? And remember, the "superficial" differences you do mention are designed for the military field for a more efficient, quicker, accurate firing...something the military looks for in a weapon. Hunters (beyond a telescope) normally don't need the superficial differences (at least not the ones of my grandfather's/father's day).

The OP proposal stands valid. It's no threat to your ability to own a gun. Bringing back a version of the 1994 AWB won't kill you, or deny you ample fire power for hunting or defense.

They shoot the same, Liberal.

 

[Matt Dillon]

Mostly superficial?

What are you leaving out? And remember, the "superficial" differences you do mention are designed for the military field for a more efficient, quicker, accurate firing...something the military looks for in a weapon. Hunters (beyond a telescope) normally don't need the superficial differences (at least not the ones of my grandfather's/father's day).

The OP proposal stands valid. It's no threat to your ability to own a gun. Bringing back a version of the 1994 AWB won't kill you, or deny you ample fire power for hunting or defense.

There's literally no difference, fucktard. Mini-14 was that? Was not included in Clinton's bullshit gun ban. Yeah, I remember that. That's why I quit the NRA because they went along with it.

Neither were SKS's which your boy used to try to mass murder Republicans at the Congressional baseball game.

My friend was like "Oh, dude! You gotta get these SKSs, they're only $115. And then I saw the bullets and how they shoot and I'm like "That's not for me."

You can't even hardly scope one of those things and the grouping sucks. I can group better with a Ruger Blackhawk. Fuck That!

Also, fuck you for advocating for another "AWB", you commie faggot.

I bet I'll have a fully-automatic and accurate .308 shooting weapon within 3 years, and TIA for your fucktardedness that brought about the pushback to retarded policies that will make that happen for millions of people!

(probably not .308, mainly other calibers, but whatever)

 

[Street Glider]

Okay, let's try it again.

I stated in no uncertain terms that the 1994 AWB list was a COMPROMISE with the gun lobby. I also stated that gunners like you are constantly harping about weapons that weren't on the list but were (in your opinion) just as good if not better than the AR-15. It's well to remember that there were those who complained that the list didn't cover enough weapons (like the Mini 14 you mention).

It comes town to a matter of opinion, assessment and compromise. Not everyone was happy with the list (pro and con), but they could live with it. Capice?

Now, are you going to answer my question or just continue to stall or dodge or obfuscate? I'll wait again.

Well, if it's a compromise, then it proves that gunphobics like you don't know what the fuck they're doing.

Operationally, the Mini 14 and the AR-15 are the same gun. That's not a matter of opinion. That's a fact. Anyone from the anti-gun side who would insist on banning the AR-15, and not the Mini 14, is a complete fucking idiot and probably shouldn't be relied on to compromise, reasonably, on anything.

Such a "compromise" proves that the anti-gun, American-hating left in this country doesn't like the AR-15 because it looks scary. Banning the AR-15, and not the Mini 14, is the absolute apex of stupidity...

 

[Street Glider]

What a tremendous fail...

your wait is over.

Except it's not, because you offered a non-answer...

But you do have bill of sale/receipts for those purchases.

For some, yes.

Most of my 40+ gun collection came from the pre-owned market. I have very few receipts. I live in Florida, Hoss. We don't register guns here...

I point these things out because if you decide to sell these weapons and they are used in the committing of a crime, the cops can point to the new owner and not YOU when they do their trace in an investigation. Same thing if they are stolen. And if a new version of the 1994 AWB is passed, you have proof that you are not breaking any laws by possessing them.

I can sell my guns with nothing more than an exchange of cash and a handshake.

But, more to the point,. you first insisted that requiring the registration of guns would decrease gun crime. But if the police are looking for who owns a gun used in a crime, then requiring the registration of that gun has decreased nothing. If the police are involved, the gun crime has already occurred.

Capice?

 

[Matt Dillon]

Well, if it's a compromise, then it proves that gunphobics like you don't know what the fuck they're doing.

Operationally, the Mini 14 and the AR-15 are the same gun. That's not a matter of opinion. That's a fact. Anyone from the anti-gun side who would insist on banning the AR-15, and not the Mini 14, is a complete fucking idiot and probably shouldn't be relied on to compromise, reasonably, on anything.

Such a "compromise" proves that the anti-gun, American-hating left in this country doesn't like the AR-15 because it looks scary. Banning the AR-15, and not the Mini 14, is the absolute apex of stupidity...

Metinks perhaps not good to give teh idiots ideas.

Bah, Mini-14s suck anyway. Definitely not the best Ruger gun to be had.

Ahh.. I just think it should be better than what it is. Basically an M1 bolt and Ruger knows how to make barrels, but wtf is going on there? You know what I'd rather have? A good-shooting HMR.

I know, I'm a weirdo. Or a .357 rifle.

Or the actual real-deal Springfield M14. That's a nice gun. Or an M1..they have those in GA. You have to pay if you wanna scope it, though.

 

[Street Glider]

Double Post

 

[Street Glider]

Double post

 

[Street Glider]

Mostly superficial?

What are you leaving out? And remember, the "superficial" differences you do mention are designed for the military field for a more efficient, quicker, accurate firing...something the military looks for in a weapon. Hunters (beyond a telescope) normally don't need the superficial differences (at least not the ones of my grandfather's/father's day).

The OP proposal stands valid. It's no threat to your ability to own a gun. Bringing back a version of the 1994 AWB won't kill you, or deny you ample fire power for hunting or defense.

You have to pick one of these to ban. Which gun do you think the government should ban, and why?