Carlos Danger Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Let me be clear I personally do not own a Gun and have no intention of buying one. I am for sensible restrictions on fire arms but an out right ban I would be against. If Hillary Clinton and he marry band of misfits were to really try and do away with the second amendment I might have to consider buying a few guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Carlos Danger said: I think history has shown us quite well what happens to unarmed masses go up against well armed authoritarian governments. I certainly am not advocating more powerful weapons to be sold to the masses. No government can last long against it's own population no matter how well it is armed as long as something like the second amendment is in place. And on the bold. One guy just took out 58 people and wounded 400 with guns he more than likely bought legally under the second amendment. There are 300 million US citizens so yea I think the people would have an excellent chance against a tyrannical government. Every Western nation has stricter gun laws than the US. Please explain why they have more freedoms than the USA.? Why haven't they been taken over by their government? Why do they all have fewer mass killings? Either the proliferation of weapons is to blame or Americans are too violent or stupid to be allowed access to the gun cabinet. Either way you'd be safer with less weapons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XC.Morrison Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 28 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: I think it is clear the founding fathers had the idea that the right to bare arms was to stop us from falling into the tyranny a state might inflict on an unarmed masses. So again what law would have stopped this? 24 minutes ago, Zambroski said: BINGO! FUCKING BINGO!!!!!!! Good grief Carlos, you just made Zam fully auto unload all over his monitor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted October 2, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 2, 2017 Just now, racinfarmer said: I have noticed this has gone unanswered... A law? How about we elvaluate our gun worshipping culture and easy access to said guns? How is Canada so immune from these tragedies relative to America? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, SnowRider said: The MN Mouthbreather is so dumb he doesn't know he's stupid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted October 2, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: Let me be clear I personally do not own a Gun and have no intention of buying one. I am for sensible restrictions on fire arms but an out right ban I would be against. If Hillary Clinton and he marry band of misfits were to really try and do away with the second amendment I might have to consider buying a few guns. Unfortunately you drink the NRA's Kool aid and lap up their propaganda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, XC.Morrison said: Good grief Carlos, you just made Zam fully auto unload all over his monitor. Well, when somebody here hits the nail on the head...I get excited. 1 minute ago, SnowRider said: A law? How about we elvaluate our gun worshipping culture and easy access to said guns? How is Canada so immune from these tragedies relative to America? Yes...let's "evaluate it" then make changes. Wait...what? Dunning-Kruger face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racinfarmer Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Just now, SnowRider said: Unfortunately you drink the NRA's Kool aid and lap up their propaganda Really quite ironic to have you telling someone they drink a groups Kool-aid and lap up their propaganda... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Just now, racinfarmer said: Really quite ironic to have you telling someone they drink a groups Kool-aid and lap up their propaganda... Only to us. And funny as hell too!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Jimmy Snacks Posted October 2, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 2, 2017 36 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: Great article. The Government put in strict gun laws, people turned in the weapons that were outlawed. People needed to prove a need for a weapon, get thoroughly checked out to prove they were of good moral character then wait 28 days. Australia had 13 mass killings in 17 years, the government implemented strict gun laws, the mass killings stopped for 20 years. But they can't prove for certain that it was the cause. Maybe they all found god. Sounds like the study wasn’t conclusive...take it up with the authors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Just now, SnowRider said: Unfortunately you drink the NRA's Kool aid and lap up their propaganda It really has nothing to do with the NRA as I do not follow them in any way. Could Pol Pot have killed 1 million of his own people so easily if even a small percentage of them had been armed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mileage Psycho Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 8 hours ago, COPO said: Democrats swiftly renewed their push for gun control within hours of the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, with congressional Democrats urging legislation and Hillary Clinton going after the National Rifle Association. A gunman killed at least 50 people in the massacre in Las Vegas, which also left more than 400 hospitalized. The casualties exceeded those of the Pulse nightclub tragedy in Florida more than a year ago. And as with the Pulse attack, the Las Vegas shooting led to prompt calls from Democrats for gun legislation, though the party has struggled to tighten laws even when the Obama administration was in power. Though details are still emerging about Sunday’s massacre, Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, took to Twitter to hammer the NRA over a push to ease federal rules for silencers. “The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots. Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get,” she tweeted, adding: “Our grief isn't enough. We can and must put politics aside, stand up to the NRA, and work together to try to stop this from happening again.” http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/02/las-vegas-shooting-clinton-blasts-nra-fellow-dems-renew-call-for-gun-control-after-attack.html Imagine the carnage the shooter could have created with a silencer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodtick Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Mileage Psycho said: Imagine the carnage the shooter could have created with a silencer. It wouldn't have lasted with that many rounds?Though he used multiple guns? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 3 minutes ago, Mileage Psycho said: Imagine the carnage the shooter could have created with a silencer. They make effective silencers out of car oil filters so I really don't see what a law will do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mileage Psycho Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 5 hours ago, Highmark said: I'd say the most innovative part of it was the idea to do it. Having guns and ammo and getting them into the room would not be difficult. Fully or semi-auto he still would have killed and injured a lot of people. Its not very difficult to empty a 30 round mag in under 10 seconds. From the time of the first 911 call to when the police breached the door was 1 hour and 12 minutes. Shooting one 30 rd mag every 2 minutes means he still could have got off 1080 shots. Even someone not very experienced could shoot that much without any weapons malfunctioning. 2 minutes ago, Woodtick said: It wouldn't have lasted with that many rounds?Though he used multiple guns? One hour and 12 minutes, with silencers it's possible that time could have been much longer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dz246 Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 3 minutes ago, Mileage Psycho said: One hour and 12 minutes, with silencers it's possible that time could have been much longer. I highly doubt no one would have noticed.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mileage Psycho Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 8 minutes ago, dz246 said: I highly doubt no one would have noticed.... One hour and 12 minutes is what it took the police to do the locate on the shooter while having the benefit of sound to help locate, odds are a silencer would have given the shooter more time to keep killing and wounding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Jimmy Snacks Posted October 3, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 3, 2017 3 minutes ago, Mileage Psycho said: One hour and 12 minutes is what it took the police to do the locate on the shooter while having the benefit of sound to help locate, odds are a silencer would have given the shooter more time to keep killing and wounding. Nice speculation....and that's all it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodtick Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 The smoke detector in the shooters room going off,helped them find the room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 #1-Stop fucking calling them "silencers". They are suppressors. And, Dear Diary...today I agreed with Vince. A SUPRESSOR would have done an excellent job of hiding the muzzle flash and kept everyone wondering where it was coming from for some time. It also would have kept carbon and smoke down. It's why I commented way early in this thread that he probably didn't have "true" auto weapons. If he did, he'd also have easy legal access to suppressors. Or illegal for that matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ez ryder Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 8 hours ago, Biggie Smails said: Leave it to cunt bag Dems to not waste a tragedy that is only hours old....fuckers should be ashamed. rules for radicals from the chapter In the Beginning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 A suppressor does nothing to mute a round that is supersonic. It will suppress the sound of a subsonic round somewhat. Vince has watched a few too many movies. A suppressor would have changed nothing here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted October 3, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 3, 2017 34 minutes ago, Zambroski said: #1-Stop fucking calling them "silencers". They are suppressors. And, Dear Diary...today I agreed with Vince. A SUPRESSOR would have done an excellent job of hiding the muzzle flash and kept everyone wondering where it was coming from for some time. It also would have kept carbon and smoke down. It's why I commented way early in this thread that he probably didn't have "true" auto weapons. If he did, he'd also have easy legal access to suppressors. Or illegal for that matter. I actually agree with the Mouthbreather 3 minutes ago, f7ben said: A suppressor does nothing to mute a round that is supersonic. It will suppress the sound of a subsonic round somewhat. Vince has watched a few too many movies. A suppressor would have changed nothing here See your buddies post 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 33 minutes ago, Zambroski said: #1-Stop fucking calling them "silencers". They are suppressors. And, Dear Diary...today I agreed with Vince. A SUPRESSOR would have done an excellent job of hiding the muzzle flash and kept everyone wondering where it was coming from for some time. It also would have kept carbon and smoke down. It's why I commented way early in this thread that he probably didn't have "true" auto weapons. If he did, he'd also have easy legal access to suppressors. Or illegal for that matter. I had clients calling me today for Shotspotter stock. Symbol: SSTI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racinfarmer Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 8 hours ago, Biggie Smails said: Leave it to cunt bag Dems to not waste a tragedy that is only hours old....fuckers should be ashamed. Kind of ironic that the best firearms salesman the world has ever seen was our last president. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.