Forum Thread

My deer rifle can be an assault rifle too

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 136 1 2 3 4 5 .. 10 Next
  • Independent
    Plymouth, WI
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I have to laugh at the anti-gun freaks who think banning assault rifles is going to stop assault rifles. Think about it, any semi auto rifle can be used for an assault rifle; the only difference between a semi-auto deer rifle and an assault rifle is the length of the barrel and stock. How hard would it be for me to cut the barrel and stock of my deer rifle shorter? Unless they ban hack saw blades too, banning assault rifles does nothing at all. Besides, what is the problem with a long barrel and stock, you really don't need short ones to assault a school or any place else that is not a real combat zone.

    Now if a politician dared to cross the NRA and ban all semi-auto rifles, then something would have been done to stop assault rifles, but no politician is going to do that, mark my words. Sorry anti-gun freaks, the assault rifle ban is only an aspirin for you, and more reason for the Not Real American to buy more guns fast, just what you anti-gun freaks didn't want, gun freaks with more guns. Maybe it is time for America to look at what really caused Sandy Hook instead of blaming a gun for the killings, guns don't have American made screwed up brains like the people who kill with them DO! Sorry to inform you extremist, an asualt rifle ban will do NOTHING to prevent another Sandy Hook, you are living a fantasy if you think it will.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    "united" like I said in many of my "threads"; the damage is already done. If there would have been proper laws way before the "assault" riffle and large clips came on the market, may also the Newtown thing would have happened, but may be with less casualties. My feeling is as yours, there are now so many guns around which at any time can come in the hands of a nut case, so all the regulations and new laws will not change that.
    Just think, 300 million plus guns around, then chances are that at least more than10% can fall in the wrong hands (as an example). So it totally then depends on the "mental health" question, on how many real nut cases are there who likely may commit something like this again.
    Thus related to "background checks", in my opinion it does not help to check if the guy had a mental history, because see the actual record, most mass killings were because the guy "snapped" at a certain moment, while before he was likely declared "normal". So personally I do not believe, the Obama "regulations" will change the chances that this will happen again; may be not at a school or so but somewhere else; enough weapons around to commit such.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Untited is addept at altering his deer rifles receiver to accept banana clips. He is also the goto guy for altering the hammer to allow for full auto.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    You make a lot of good points unitedmajority, but I would have to take issue with some of your characterizations of "anti gun freaks" and what they are calling for. I do not classify myself as anti-gun, and neither do many of them, but I do sympathize with them on many fronts. It is very true that an assault weapons ban; a background check; a cooling off period between purchase and receipt; etc. would not have prevented Sandy Hook. It is also true that it may not have prevented the Aurora or Virginia Tech mass shootings. In the same breath, there is zero reason that Seung-Hui Cho should have passed a background check because of his mental health history.

    One thing you did not bring up with the NRA proposal to have an armed guard in every school. I'm interested in your thoughts on that, especially since I have yet to hear a sound argument for it from anyone that does support this proposal. Keep in mind that Columbine had two armed guards and Virginia Tech had a campus police force at its disposal. What about arming our teachers? I can see the headlines now: "Teacher snaps and kills 12 students." What would the NRA stance be at the press conference they call after that shooting? Arm all students?

    When did the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution become the Holy Grail of Amendments? The 2nd Amendment does not supersede every other Amendment in our Constitution. It doesn't supersede my right to talk freely about my belief that we need to look at ways to help prevent senseless violence in this country. We no longer live in the time of muskets and bayonets. The weapons that are made today belong in the theater of War, not on our streets. I have yet to understand why someone needs a clip of 20 or more bullets to take down a deer.

    I'm a firm proponent of our 2nd Amendment's right to keep and bear arms. That does not mean that I believe I am entitled to a tank or an apache helicopter. We can have sensible gun laws in this country that will continue to allow law abiding citizens to keep and bear their arms, while getting rid of loop holes that allow convicted violent felons go to a gun show and buy one without any background check. It's just common sense in my book.
  • Independent
    California
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    am I mistaken or didn't the weapons belong to the mother and sub teacher of the sandyhook school. does that mean family members should also have back ground checks of mentally ill adults and/or children. what about neighbors of a person buying guns...
  • Independent
    Plymouth, WI
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    WovenGems Wrote: Untited is addept at altering his deer rifles receiver to accept banana clips. He is also the goto guy for altering the hammer to allow for full auto.
    For one, I really don't own a rifle, I added that to make my point. For two, I have no problem with a ban on clips over 10 rounds, but many deer riffles have ten round clips, and yes, their are many out there that could alter a clip to hold more rounds no problem. Like the point I made prior, an assault rifle ban does nothing at all, you have confirmed this, you just had the wrong guy.
  • Independent
    Plymouth, WI
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote: You make a lot of good points unitedmajority, but I would have to take issue with some of your characterizations of "anti gun freaks" and what they are calling for. I do not classify myself as anti-gun, and neither do many of them, but I do sympathize with them on many fronts. It is very true that an assault weapons ban; a background check; a cooling off period between purchase and receipt; etc. would not have prevented Sandy Hook. It is also true that it may not have prevented the Aurora or Virginia Tech mass shootings. In the same breath, there is zero reason that Seung-Hui Cho should have passed a background check because of his mental health history.

    One thing you did not bring up with the NRA proposal to have an armed guard in every school. I'm interested in your thoughts on that, especially since I have yet to hear a sound argument for it from anyone that does support this proposal. Keep in mind that Columbine had two armed guards and Virginia Tech had a campus police force at its disposal. What about arming our teachers? I can see the headlines now: "Teacher snaps and kills 12 students." What would the NRA stance be at the press conference they call after that shooting? Arm all students?

    When did the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution become the Holy Grail of Amendments? The 2nd Amendment does not supersede every other Amendment in our Constitution. It doesn't supersede my right to talk freely about my belief that we need to look at ways to help prevent senseless violence in this country. We no longer live in the time of muskets and bayonets. The weapons that are made today belong in the theater of War, not on our streets. I have yet to understand why someone needs a clip of 20 or more bullets to take down a deer.

    I'm a firm proponent of our 2nd Amendment's right to keep and bear arms. That does not mean that I believe I am entitled to a tank or an apache helicopter. We can have sensible gun laws in this country that will continue to allow law abiding citizens to keep and bear their arms, while getting rid of loop holes that allow convicted violent felons go to a gun show and buy one without any background check. It's just common sense in my book.
    You are right, my characterization is a bit harsh maybe, but it is a bit frustrating to see all the people demanding an assault riffle ban, thinking this is going to prevent the next Sandy Hook. Sure ban the new pistol grip type assault riffles, but to ban a SKS that is no different than my deer riffle but shorter, is not doing a thing and is not fair to all who use a SKS for hunting. Basically I am on your side when it comes to banning large capacity clips, but to ban one kind of semi-auto weapon, really isn't going to prevent much. I am against gun shows "selling," this makes no sense, it is called a show not a sale, and I agree if a gun show sells then all the back ground checks that apply at a gun store must apply at shows too. I believe in the cooling off period too and most gun laws.

    For sure the present gun laws need to be enforced, especially when a bad guy is caught with a gun, the key to their jail cell should be thrown away, then see how many now a day fake gang bangs walk around with a gun shooting it into crowds, if they know they will be in jail for a very long time when caught with a gun. Yes Sandy Hook is a huge sadness on this country, but people are shooting people everyday now, for little or no reason, just because they had a gun handy to full fill their tempers needs. I am totally against concealed carry, this is an infringement of my rights. Back in the day when people needed a gun to be safe, before police were just a phone call away, people strapped their gun to their side, in plain view for anyone to see, this was a sign to the bad guys, "mess with me and I will pull my gun." Back then, if a person didn't want to hang with someone packing a gun, it was easy to know who the gun guys were and you could avoid them if you wanted to. Now, I have no idea who is packing a gun, I no longer have the freedom to choose not to hang with a gun person, because no one knows who they are now a days. Sure carry a gun for protection if you feel the need, but carry it where I can see it so if I feel the need not to hang with you and your gun I can make that choice with out being infringed.

    As far as putting gun men in school, that is a fricken joke, I have posted many comments to that subject in other threads, one I started titled, "No more school deaths, tell President Obama," but I have no problem sharing my thoughts on that subject here for you too. A gun man at school for sure brings guns to school, the last thing any parent wants their children around, still, something needs to be done, my solution is a gun sniffing working school dog, a dog that will sniff out any gun man or woman and take them out, before the coward knows what hit them. Think about it, a dog will fight to the death to defend us, and a dog is a fraction of the long term cost of a gun man at school. An armed guard is an easy target for a gun man, an attack dog that the gun man does not know where it is going to come from, is not an easy target. Just having a guard dog at school would stop another coward from entering the school with the dog, why, because the last thing these cowards want to happen is getting taken alive, a dog will make that happen easy, compared to the dead now unarmed school gun man guard that a gun man could identify and eliminate easy, but to eliminate one or more attack dogs coming from different directions, is a whole different story, a story no coward will want to be part of. NRA can take their idea and stick it where the sun does not shine, I would send my child to the school protected by a dog before one protected by a gun, in fact, if I had a child that had to go to school with an armed guard their, I would home school.
  • Independent
    Plymouth, WI
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    con citz Wrote: am I mistaken or didn't the weapons belong to the mother and sub teacher of the sandyhook school. does that mean family members should also have back ground checks of mentally ill adults and/or children. what about neighbors of a person buying guns...
    You are correct, and mental health test for gun owners really isn't going to change much, since these people act normal until they snap. What needs to change is America's mind set when it comes to guns. Sure have a gun, but keep it at home LOCKED UP and not in public, when it is taken into public, the NRA freaks who carry them, end up in prison 10,000 times more because of their gun, than they do protecting them self with it. America mind set infected by the NRA is putting people in prison, not saving them. People need to stop thinking this is the wild wild west, and if they are going to think that way, then at least put your gun where I can see it like they did in the wild wild west before police and phones so I can avoid you like the plague. I don't want to be around a gun freak when they do their gun crime and end up in prison for the rest of their life. Hmm, I wonder what these NRA freaks in prison think about the NRA now, bet they wish they were never a member, too late for them, but it is not too late for future prison bound members? Who would of ever thought joining an organization would put you behind bars, but that is exactly what the NRA members end up with, at least all too many of them.
  • Independent
    Plymouth, WI
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    unitedmajority Wrote:
    con citz Wrote: am I mistaken or didn't the weapons belong to the mother and sub teacher of the sandyhook school. does that mean family members should also have back ground checks of mentally ill adults and/or children. what about neighbors of a person buying guns...
    You are correct, and mental health test for gun owners really isn't going to change much, since these people act normal until they snap. What needs to change is America's mind set when it comes to guns. Sure have a gun, but keep it at home LOCKED UP and not in public, when it is taken into public, the NRA freaks who carry them, end up in prison 10,000 times more because of their gun, than they do protecting them self with it. America mind set infected by the NRA is putting people in prison, not saving them. People need to stop thinking this is the wild wild west, and if they are going to think that way, then at least put your gun where I can see it like they did in the wild wild west before police and phones so I can avoid you like the plague. I don't want to be around a gun freak when they do their gun crime and end up in prison for the rest of their life. Hmm, I wonder what these NRA freaks in prison think about the NRA now, bet they wish they were never a member, too late for them, but it is not too late for future prison bound members? Who would of ever thought joining an organization would put you behind bars, but that is exactly what the NRA members end up with, at least all too many of them.
  • Independent
    California
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    so u r saying the mother should b in locked up? do u think she had them to protect herself from her own son? have u heard anything from (or about) the mother? DID she have a background check? did them ask about the mental health of her family members? did she have the guns locked up or in her bedroom? at the front door?
  • Independent
    California
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    so u r saying the mother should b in locked up because her son snapped? do u think she had them to protect herself from her own son? have u heard anything from (or about) the mother? DID she have a background check? did them ask about the mental health of her family members? did she have the guns locked up or in her bedroom? at the front door?
  • Other Party
    Dallas, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Have you heard about the Texas software company that's sending their employees to CHL training? The owner of the company thinks that people will be less likely to give up their 2nd Amendment rights if they fully understand what they are giving up.
    http://www.carillonerp.com/blog/2ndamendment
  • Independent
    California
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    thanks 4 the link. read it. really didn't give many answers...
  • Independent
    Plymouth, WI
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    con citz Wrote: so u r saying the mother should b in locked up because her son snapped? do u think she had them to protect herself from her own son? have u heard anything from (or about) the mother? DID she have a background check? did them ask about the mental health of her family members? did she have the guns locked up or in her bedroom? at the front door?
    I don't care who you are, if you are going to have a gun then you and you alone are responsible for what that gun does, snapped son or not. Don't lock your guns up if you don't want to, but when your gun kills someone, you should be just as guilty as the one using the gun, because if it wasn't for your unsecure gun, no one would of gotten shot with your gun. The NRA wants everyone to have a gun, no matter what, everyone with a gun should be held accountable for what their gun does period, mom got what she had coming, so should everyone else with unsecure guns.

    Instead of getting a useless locked up assault rifle for home protection, get a pit bull from the humane society, you will at least have a chance to save your ass, instead being the ass that got others killed with her guns.
  • Independent
    Ohio
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    "You don't need an AR-15 for hunting." Yes we know that. AR-15 owners are not claiming that they are hunting with these rifles. So why do we keep on making an arguement where there is none. They never said it was about hunting.