Americans - Would you change gun laws?

[Beckwin]

I would have them relaxed to the point where people with no criminal history or mental history and is a U.S. citizen over the age of 21(basically a clean record) could take part in the 2 for 1 sale on belt fed machine guns at wal-mart. However at the same time, the punishment for illegal possession of firearms should also be increased exponentially.

Basically, the government should fear its citizens, and I'm sorry to say, but California doesn't fear your built in 10 clip AR-15s and does as it pleases.

Oh, the government should fear it's citizens... but in a way we see more often in Europe with more frequent large-scale protests and in the extreme cases, riots. They should fear that more of us will actually vote as well. But you don't win battles with your government by using firearms these days, at least not in first world countries.

[Delta_9]

I've already stated my opinion, but this is why I hate this hypocrisy that is assault weapon bans. In before "omg gun lobby".

http://lh6.google.com/ajbDelta9/R6HC...eral_bans5.jpg

http://lh5.google.com/ajbDelta9/R6HC...eral_bans3.jpg

http://lh6.google.com/ajbDelta9/R6HC...eral_bans1.jpg

[Melchiah]

Beckwin and I will both agree that assault weapons have no place outside of a military facility or a war zone. I do not require an AR-15 or an M-16 to ensure my personal safety. My 9mm semi-auto will do the job just fine.

[Beckwin]

I need one to feel like a badass and show that deer who's fucking boss at the same time.

[Melchiah]

Only pussies carry assault rifles Beckwin. You wanna show that deer who has the bigger kielbasa, you should shoot for no less than a Howitzer.

[BIGSTIC]

Honestly what is the differance between an AR-15 and your semi auto 9mm. I can see you argueing folding stock, threaded barrells, pistol grips, and high capacity clip/magazine. But semi-auto is still semi-auto. Everyone should already know fully auto is pretty much impossible to obtain legally. I personally see nothing wrong with an AR-15 as sold today. They are a fun gun to throw some rounds through out at the range. Hell my tattoo artist uses his AR to hunt dear. They are accurate and hold up well why not use it to hunt with?

Yeah we dont need 50 round magazines. We dont need folding stocks. We dont need threaded barrells. But saying you are fine with a 9mm and bash a guy who buys a AR is pretty lame. They are both deadly weapons.

Plus I like my Barrett 82A1 and no I dont want to give it up :D

Now MAC-10 should all be collected and destroyed and erased from our collective history. Worthless gun they are.

[Melchiah]

My Ruger cannot be made into a fully automatic weapon with a 10 dollar mail order kit. My Ruger also has a maximum capacity of 17 rounds, not 30 or 50. That is the difference. I'm not bashing anyone for buying an AR-15, but really let's not bullshit each other, the .44 magnum, 30-30 or .30-06 are the weapons you should be using to drop a deer. If you were a real sportsman, you wouldn't be chasing his ass through the brambles with a semi-auto rifle with a bottomless mag in it... that isn't sportsmanship. Sportsmanship is tracking the animal, picking your post, picking your shot with a bolt action rifle such that you only get one shot. If you miss, tough titties, come back tomorrow. ARs to hunt with is ludicrous and unsportsmanlike. At least in my opinion.

[Cletis]

voted no because everyone who is smart enough should have the ability to fill out the forms to put in a request to take a test to own a gun.



and did i really go through here without a picture of a dude with bear arms ?

[Ryushii]

The biggest thing I agree with that anyone said here is that compromise between gun owners and liberal hippies is pretty much impossible with the latter running around using the word "ban." We don't need a ban, and in fact it would probably make things worse; what we do need is a few tighter laws here and there, many ideas of which have already been discussed (I personally like the ideas surrounding making handguns harder to get: do any gun owners actually care if it takes them an extra week to get their guns in the name of saving lives?). I voted No, though I guess I should have voted Yes...though by voting Yes I would have felt like a dumb BAN BAN liberal. (as irony would have it, I'm liberal in almost every other facet of public opinion...).

[Demosthenes11]

the original 24-hour provision on buying handguns had 0 impact on gun crime
what makes you think a week provision would have an impact?

It might make sense to you and me, but we aren't the ones going out shooting people

[Nibe]

A

[Remyo]

My Ruger cannot be made into a fully automatic weapon with a 10 dollar mail order kit. My Ruger also has a maximum capacity of 17 rounds, not 30 or 50. That is the difference. I'm not bashing anyone for buying an AR-15, but really let's not bullshit each other, the .44 magnum, 30-30 or .30-06 are the weapons you should be using to drop a deer. If you were a real sportsman, you wouldn't be chasing his ass through the brambles with a semi-auto rifle with a bottomless mag in it... that isn't sportsmanship. Sportsmanship is tracking the animal, picking your post, picking your shot with a bolt action rifle such that you only get one shot. If you miss, tough titties, come back tomorrow. ARs to hunt with is ludicrous and unsportsmanlike. At least in my opinion.

most handguns have extended mags to use. AR-15 fires a .223, which is a pretty common deer cartridge, and standard mags hold 20 rounds, some regions require a locap mag of 5-10 rounds w/ some hunters prefering them to be able to fire the gun using a benchrest

[Beckwin]

So you can't educate people to vote, but you can educate them to know not to use guns for bad things.

I dunno, I see a contradiction in that.

[BIGSTIC]

hmm last time I checked just because it can hold alot doesnt mean it has too. Do you really think we roll through the forest guns a blazing trying to hit everything we see? Dont call us out on some misconception that you came up with. We take hunting very seriously up here.

Also what you gonna do with a fully auto fire arm. All they can do is sit in your house cause every range I go to will have the cops so far up your ass if you walk on with a fully auto gun without the propper paper work. And once again it is illeagal to modify firearms so once again we are dealing with people who dont care about laws in the first place.

Dont get me wrong because yes most people look at them and say "Oh that is soooooo coooool I want one". These are the people we need to educate. I look at most "assult" weapons like I look at sports cars, worthless in 99% of the situations but if you have the cash why not waste it.

[Nibe]

A

[sephir]

I'm not American, instead I'm from the hippy loving country known as Canada. I don't consider myself anti-gun, as I do think hunting is a part of our heritage, however guns are different now than they were in the past.

Assault weapons should be banned outright. You do not need a fully automatic to hunt deer, or even skeet shooting. All these things do is provide the need for mass killings (we all know Columbine). These were invented for war purposes and should remain so.

They are effectively banned. No one, and I mean no one can go out and buy a machine gun without being scrutinized to hell and I'm not talking about some bullshit instant background check. I'm talking ATF doing a fulll conclusive background check into every nook and cranny of your life.

Why the fuck does machineguns issue even come up? Oh that's right, if a firearm LOOKS like a machinegun, then it is assumed to be a machinegun.

National Firearms Act of 1933. Look it up.

The firearms used in Columbine were all semi-autos. And Cho killed 32 people with 2 pistols.

None of those firearms were "fully automatic". None.

Anti-armor ammunition should also be banned outright. An armor piercing bullet is not used to shoot deer. These provide dangers to police officers and army as they cannot have any protection.

What do you defined as "anti-armor" bullets? You don't need a hard-cored ammo to pierce the vest we police officers wear. Any rifle round can punch thorough Level II-A armor. This is the most comfortable armor we can wear and they were meant to stop handgun rounds, not rifle rounds.

BTW AP ammo is banned.

I know automatic and armor piercing bullets were banned in the US during the Clinton era, but im just saying in general, that the fact they were sold to the public originally was stupid. I know the weapons used at columbine were semi-auto, and never claimed that they were fully auto, I just brought up Columbine to reiterate the point that there is a problem with having that many bullets in a gun that can fire that quickly.

Handguns as well, if you limited the bullet amount to say 5 bullets per clip, im sure it would be much more difficult for many of these things to occur. But I know im speaking the near impossible .

[Infiltrator]

I would have them relaxed to the point where people with no criminal history or mental history and is a U.S. citizen over the age of 21(basically a clean record) could take part in the 2 for 1 sale on belt fed machine guns at wal-mart. However at the same time, the punishment for illegal possession of firearms should also be increased exponentially.

Basically, the government should fear its citizens, and I'm sorry to say, but California doesn't fear your built in 10 clip AR-15s and does as it pleases.

Oh, the government should fear it's citizens... but in a way we see more often in Europe with more frequent large-scale protests and in the extreme cases, riots.

This isn't Europe. You're only allowed to protest in free speech zones here. What is a free speech zone? It's an area where you're allowed to protest, surrounded by fences or barracades with cops in full riot gear ready to crack skulls at the slightest sign of unrest. In cases of riots you can bet the state government will mobilize the National Guards and declare martial law.

They should fear that more of us will actually vote as well. But you don't win battles with your government by using firearms these days, at least not in first world countries.

You know people actually AGREE that protesters should be arrested because they don't think their message is patriotic? Hell most people think torture is perfectly acceptable and that censoring the media is acceptable! You can talk about voting but what happens if half the population votes the OTHER WAY?

Half the country think the Patriot Act is a GOOD thing and that domestic spying is a GOOD thing.

Beckwin and I will both agree that assault weapons have no place outside of a military facility or a war zone. I do not require an AR-15 or an M-16 to ensure my personal safety. My 9mm semi-auto will do the job just fine.

Maybe you oughta read the actual CONTENT of the old Federal AWB law. Because they do have a clause for pistols as well. So if you think your pistol is safe, think again.

My Ruger cannot be made into a fully automatic weapon with a 10 dollar mail order kit.

Please stop making up bullshit. 10 dollars? The last DIAS I saw that was fully legal and registered NFA item went for a few thousand dollars.

My Ruger also has a maximum capacity of 17 rounds, not 30 or 50.

Your pistol has fixed magazine? No? Then your max cap is totally dependent on an externally dettachable magazine's capacity. Glocks have 30 rnd magazines available and so do a number of other pistols.

If you were a real sportsman, you wouldn't be chasing his ass through the brambles with a semi-auto rifle with a bottomless mag in it... that isn't sportsmanship. Sportsmanship is tracking the animal, picking your post, picking your shot with a bolt action rifle such that you only get one shot. If you miss, tough titties, come back tomorrow. ARs to hunt with is ludicrous and unsportsmanlike. At least in my opinion.

Is it ok if i hunt with a Ruger Mini-14?

[Infiltrator]

I'm not American, instead I'm from the hippy loving country known as Canada. I don't consider myself anti-gun, as I do think hunting is a part of our heritage, however guns are different now than they were in the past.

Assault weapons should be banned outright. You do not need a fully automatic to hunt deer, or even skeet shooting. All these things do is provide the need for mass killings (we all know Columbine). These were invented for war purposes and should remain so.

They are effectively banned. No one, and I mean no one can go out and buy a machine gun without being scrutinized to hell and I'm not talking about some bullshit instant background check. I'm talking ATF doing a fulll conclusive background check into every nook and cranny of your life.

Why the fuck does machineguns issue even come up? Oh that's right, if a firearm LOOKS like a machinegun, then it is assumed to be a machinegun.

National Firearms Act of 1933. Look it up.

The firearms used in Columbine were all semi-autos. And Cho killed 32 people with 2 pistols.

None of those firearms were "fully automatic". None.

Anti-armor ammunition should also be banned outright. An armor piercing bullet is not used to shoot deer. These provide dangers to police officers and army as they cannot have any protection.

What do you defined as "anti-armor" bullets? You don't need a hard-cored ammo to pierce the vest we police officers wear. Any rifle round can punch thorough Level II-A armor. This is the most comfortable armor we can wear and they were meant to stop handgun rounds, not rifle rounds.

BTW AP ammo is banned.

I know automatic and armor piercing bullets were banned in the US during the Clinton era

Are you like dense or something? The control of Machineguns what you call "fully automatic" have been in place since the thirties.

NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT (1934 not 1933, I have the year wrong)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_F ... _Regulated

The NFA defines a number of categories of weapons which are regulated therein. Collectively, these are known as "Title II" weapons and include the following:

1) Machine guns - this includes any firearm which can fire more than 1 cartridge per trigger pull. Both continuous fully-automatic fire and "burst fire" (ie, weapons with a 3-round burst feature) are considered machine gun features.

The Federal "Assault Weapon" Ban that happened under Clinton in 1994

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_As ... eapons_Ban

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) was a subtitle of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, a federal law of the United States that included a prohibition on the sale to civilians of certain semi-automatic "assault weapons" manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment.

The Clinton AWB had JACK ALL to do with machineguns (fully automatic firarms) rather it was a ban on firearms that LOOK like their true military counterpart. Semi-auto firearms.

but im just saying in general, that the fact they were sold to the public originally was stupid.

and how many massacres have been committed by full-auto weapons in the last 2 or 3 decades?

I know the weapons used at columbine were semi-auto, and never claimed that they were fully auto, I just brought up Columbine to reiterate the point that there is a problem with having that many bullets in a gun that can fire that quickly.

So full-auto, semi-auto.. None of that shit makes a difference anyway because your argument will change no matter what kind of weapon used. Next up, the harmless deer rifle with a scope. It's all good until someone climbs a tower and starts picking people off. Then it becomes a DEADLY sniper rifle and needs to be banned.

Handguns as well, if you limited the bullet amount to say 5 bullets per clip, im sure it would be much more difficult for many of these things to occur. But I know im speaking the near impossible .

They said the same about 10 rd magazines.

"What do you need more then 10 bullets for!?", they said.

Then Cho came a long and now 10 is too much. Now it's 5. How long before that changes?

[Demosthenes11]

who pissed in your cereal? jesus man

[Beckwin]

This isn't Europe. You're only allowed to protest in free speech zones here. What is a free speech zone? It's an area where you're allowed to protest, surrounded by fences or barracades with cops in full riot gear ready to crack skulls at the slightest sign of unrest. In cases of riots you can bet the state government will mobilize the National Guards and declare martial law.

-----------

You know people actually AGREE that protesters should be arrested because they don't think their message is patriotic? Hell most people think torture is perfectly acceptable and that censoring the media is acceptable! You can talk about voting but what happens if half the population votes the OTHER WAY?

Half the country think the Patriot Act is a GOOD thing and that domestic spying is a GOOD thing.

Police respond to protests/riots in Europe as well. They're generally considered pretty good at it too.

I'm against the PATRIOT ACT as well.

My question is how do guns factor in to protesting and public opinion/elected representative voting on the PATRIOT ACT? I'm just not seeing the correlation. And don't come with some slippery slope thing; pro-gun are more likely to support/legislate PATRIOT ACT anyway.