Another mass shooting deserves a better answer.

Discussion in 'United States' started by kungfuliberal, Aug 3, 2019.

  1. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You need to brush up on your reading comprehension, son. The word "slight" means just that....YOU like to imply that there's a full blown out line. Hint: if that were the case, then ankle holsters would have gone the way of the dinosaur LONG time ago. And since they haven't, my statements stands and YOU are just stubbornly blathering on about something you have NEVER been exposed to in real life. My Pop just shook his head and laughed when I told him about your proud ignorance in this manner. Thanks for that, made his day!
     
  2. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'll pick this up later, folks.
     
  3. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    25,728
    Likes Received:
    8,770
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My female friends hide full bottles of wine inside their light weight summer dresses when we go to festivals and have got past security into festivals. They will do the same this coming weekend at out next festival. Wine bottles are much bigger than your standard hand guns.
     
    kungfuliberal likes this.
  4. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And if you make a slight variation and change the name guess what? Not banned.
    Additionally: see how they only banned the folding stock variant of the mini 14? Whomp whomp
     
  5. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The above is nothing more than more senseless blathering from one who has already admitted that firearm-related restrictions do not work. It was yourself who stated law enforcement was finding fully-automatic firearms in the possession of criminals, despite said firearms being subject to strict regulation and registration. Either the ATF lost track of those firearms and no longer know they exist, or they were being successfully smuggled into the united states.
     
  6. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For the simple fact that firearms classified as so-called "assault weapons" are classified as such on the basis of cosmetic features, and cosmetic features alone. The legislation itself has stated such when listing the qualifying features, such as threaded muzzles, flash suppressors, or bayonet lugs. Nothing that affects the functionality of the firearm in any conceivable manner.
     
  7. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One does not legally have to possess a valid need for owning any particular firearms. Simply wishing to own such is all the justification necessary.

    In every instance where the confiscation of legally owned firearms has been implemented, it has always, without so much as a single incident of exception, been preceded by the registration of legally owned firearms.

    Such is sufficient reason to oppose registration requirements.
     
  8. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The various firearm manufacturers of the united states would simply produce AR-15 variant rifles designed to comply with the prohibition, while still being an AR-15 in terms of the spirit of the design. Just as they did during the ten year period firearms such as the AR-15 were supposedly prohibited.
     
  9. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And then there is this, the Ruger AR-556.

    https://ruger.com/products/ar556/overview.html

    [​IMG]

    For all intents and purposes, an AR015 rifle. Yet it is not named in the legislation, meaning it is not prohibited due to not being included on the list of names.

    The Ruger manufacturing company has even gone one step beyond even that, by producing a variant legal for sale in the state of California.

    [​IMG]

    For all intents and purposes, it is the exact same firearm, and functions exactly the same.
     
  10. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Since when are facts a "non-sequitor"? The whole selling point of the AR-15 (style) was it's versatility and adaptability....the gun salesmen merely tweaked here and there to get around the parameters laid out in the 1994 AWB. Once sunset occured, the NRA flunky GOP blocked any attempt to re-establish it. That the weapons used in El Paso & Dayton were on that list means that had the AWB been in effect, the shooters would not of had those weapons of choice. Period.

    To date, there has been no rational rebuttal to the suggestion in the OP, no matter what detour you and your like minded compadres take.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2019
  11. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No kidding? And that's okay by you? Because the AWB isn't in effect, and El Paso and Dayton didn't have to buy "variations" by sellers who put profit over lives....just like you do with some selfish, fantasy/paranoid driven ideology. "whomp whomp" doesn't cut it for the families of the deceased, you know. That is a REALITY you are in denial of.
     
  12. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You need to stop lying by juxtaposing various points throughout this thread to formulate your assertions and allegations. Your first sentence is a lie, as I "admitted" no such thing. That weapons that were previously on the AWB list have been used in the last 20 years by various mass shooters...proof positive that such ban list does indeed work, as there were a plethora of other weapons available. So it is YOU who are babbling nonsense in the face of historically valid, documented facts. And spare us all your fantasy babbling like your las sentence, as the chronology of the posts shows that I have produced FACTS to counter your speculations.
     
  13. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yet for all intended purposes, the shooters in El Paso and Dayton did NOT choose such as you listed, but weapons THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY ON THE 1994 AWB LIST. A matter of fact, a sad matter of history that you and your ilk cannot get past.

    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation...-in-this-weekends-shootings-are-controversial
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2019
  14. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    When added up, you're blowing smoke. The bottom line is that the weapons used in El Paso and Dayton were on the 1994 AWB list....PERIOD. For those slow on the uptake, this means that if said law was in effect, those weapons would not have been available....as they were the WEAPONS OF CHOICE by the shooters in spite of a plethora of other weapons available. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation...-in-this-weekends-shootings-are-controversial

    You've got nothing but empty repetition and denial, kid. Unless you can come up with something new, I'd say you're done here.
     
  15. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    But they didn't, as it was no longer necessary. And despite a plethora of other weapons available, these were the ones chosen
    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation...-in-this-weekends-shootings-are-controversial

    Reality sadly trumps your "would of, could of, might have" baloney.
     
  16. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    1. I wasn't asking you, I was asking Roo … who beyond a childish 'because I want it' mentality can't muster up a logical reason (to date, none of the gunners on this thread profess to be collectors). And how has that simple mindset you just expressed worked out over the years?

    2. An over-simplification tantamount to a lie....as the "confiscation" was for weapons purchased AFTER such laws were issued, or for weapons that were previously banned years earlier. If you can prove otherwise, please do with documented facts, as I tire of deconstructing your vivid imagination.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2019
  17. Bush Lawyer

    Bush Lawyer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2018
    Messages:
    15,033
    Likes Received:
    9,491
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    No it is not racist, any more or less than using the word 'Jap' is...and that is not racist either.

    It is important to Aussies because we showed you how to solve it. Get rid of the bloody guns. Further, when the USA farts we get a whiff here.
     
  18. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Parroting moot points that still doesn't change the facts: gun sellers tweaked their merchandise to skirt the law...but after the law sun set, there was no need for this, AND DESPITE THE PLETHORA OF WEAPONS AVAILABLE, THE SHOOTERS IN EL PASO AND DAYTON CHOSE THE ONES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY ON THE LIST. You just can't get past that, so unless you've got something other than a rehash of technical moot points and speculations, I'd say you're done here.
     
  19. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The obvious question of "so what?" must be asked with regard to the above. What ultimate, meaningful difference, does such actually make?
     
  20. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ultimately what meaningful difference is made if the firearm used is one covered by the prohibition, or one that is redesigned to comply with the prohibition? The caliber is the exact same, the method of function is the exact same, so what difference is made to render such meaningful?
     
  21. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Would a meaningful difference had been made if the firearms utilized were absent the qualifying features, such as bayonet lugs and threaded muzzles? Is it being stated on the part of yourself that if the firearms utilized did not possess flash suppressors, fewer individuals would have been murdered as a direct result of the absence of the flash suppressor?
     
  22. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Such is the system in place in the united states. Constitutional rights are not based on the concept of need. One does not legally have to justify why they choose to exercise their constitutional rights in the manner that they choose.

    How does such disprove the claim being made? The registration of privately owned firearms has led to the confiscation of privately owned firearms.
     
  23. TheKeefer

    TheKeefer Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2016
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    43

    I find it quite amusing that the anti gun nuts avoid talking about the massive amount of inner city shootings that happen every day of the year and only point to the headliner stories.

    I also find it amusing that you think CCW holders are out there to protect everyone.

    You post reeks of hyperbole and sensationalism, while lacking of any real informative substance.
     
  24. MelKor

    MelKor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2019
    Messages:
    1,154
    Likes Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    7 are Dead...You babble What about what about
     
    kungfuliberal likes this.
  25. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    First off, divorce yourself from the silly notion/tired, lame mantra that anyone who advocates for better gun control is a "anti-gun nut". Nothing in the OP is anti-gun...it does advocate/propose for a more efficient means of limiting gun usage by the criminal/mentally off folk out there.

    Second, if you want to talk about the crime stats in inner cities (dog whistle by bigots meaning black folk) involving guns, let's do that … as the issue of the "iron pipeline" has been in the MSM before. You know, where guns used in crimes in one state are purchased in another with much lesser or lax gun laws, and then sold to criminals via a "legit" strawman buyer. The OP proposal would go a long way and putting a crimp on those stats.

    Third, no one said CCW holders were a secondary police force. I merely referred to the time honored bilge put out by the NRA and it's flunkies that more guns in the general population would deter and stop mass shooters. Since Texas is an open carry state AND permits CCW's, you have to wonder why one of those stalwart citizens didn't spring into action in El Paso? Now before you respond, note that the issue of the signs barring weapons at the store entrance(s) could not apply to a CCW unless there were pat downs or metal detectors. This has already been addressed in this thread.

    Bottom line: your response displays the usual willful ignorance of knee jerk NRA flunky retorts.
     

Share This Page