Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 8/15/04 08:56 PM, Gunter45 wrote: Since when have we been taking about fully automatic weapons? Not for the last time (someone is going to bring this ridiculous comment up again, you can count on it), nobody is supporting the legalization of automatic weapons. Assault weapons != automatic weapons, there is a difference. The assault weapon ban covers semi-automatic rifles, cartridge size, and I think some caliburs. There's some other stuff, too, but automatic weapons have been banned since the 30s.

Never fear, Spook is here! :P
Gunter my friend, you are correct again. Yet again someone thinks that the so-called assualt weapons are automatic. I should start a thread called assualt weapons are not full auto. Noone I am aware of is advocating full auto weaponry. The AWB as is covers:

Mags.
Folding stocks.
Flash suppressors.
Bayonet lugs.
etc.

The Improved assualt weapons ban as supported by JFK himself, bans all semi-auto rifles, semi-auto shotguns, alot of bolts and other guns.

At 8/15/04 08:56 PM, Gunter45 wrote:

At 8/15/04 08:50 PM, Raistlin230 wrote: (my reply is to civilian use)

Because frankly, they're unnecessary. As put earlier, if you take them hunting, there is NO challenge whatsoever. You just 'spray and pray' as it was once said. There is no skill involved to pull a trigger and hope you hit something.

Situation: A pistol/shotgun toting lunatic is at the mall, and fires into a crowd. The weapons, being semi automatic, have to be squeezed again and again to fire, then reload, as the clips of the pistol arent very big, and shotguns have to be reloaded every time. he fires into the crowd and kills 3-4 people

Situation 2: An M-16 weilding maniac is at the mall, and fires into the crowd. He holds the trigger down and sprays the area, and pops out his clip, and pops another in. he sprays bullets into the crowd and kills 10-20 people.

or he's taken down my a 'concerned citizen the moment he walks in toting said weapon in an offensive position. you assume noone but the police will respond to a threat directed at them. that's sad.

(assuming both have a general knowledge of their weapon, e.g. a basic felon/thief/lunatic)
Who killed more people, and who would be harder for the local police force to stop?

But there's one thing you're missing. These are criminals. They don't obey laws and bans. Even though many superior weapons are available, legally for that matter, than the standard pistols used by criminals. They usually don't get their hands on them anyway, usually because they can't afford the prices. Criminals for the most part are poor, so automatic-weapon toting criminals are extremely rare. Even when automatics were cash & carry, the crime rates of them being used in crimes were extremely low, perhaps lower than today.

Since when have we been taking about fully automatic weapons? Not for the last time (someone is going to bring this ridiculous comment up again, you can count on it), nobody is supporting the legalization of automatic weapons. Assault weapons != automatic weapons, there is a difference. The assault weapon ban covers semi-automatic rifles, cartridge size, and I think some caliburs. There's some other stuff, too, but automatic weapons have been banned since the 30s.

Actually, I am supporting the legalization of automatic weapons, which has absolutely nothign to do with the AWB.

At 8/16/04 12:18 AM, Einzelgaenger wrote: or he's taken down my a 'concerned citizen the moment he walks in toting said weapon in an offensive position. you assume noone but the police will respond to a threat directed at them. that's sad.

He'd pretty much get shot if a CCW holder was around. Heck, even hunters could run to their vehicles if they store said weapons in the truck.

But there's one thing you're missing. These are criminals. They don't obey laws and bans. Even though many superior weapons are available, legally for that matter, than the standard pistols used by criminals. They usually don't get their hands on them anyway, usually because they can't afford the prices. Criminals for the most part are poor, so automatic-weapon toting criminals are extremely rare. Even when automatics were cash & carry, the crime rates of them being used in crimes were extremely low, perhaps lower than today.

Good points. Criminals will never follow the laws. No matter how many are passed. Pistols are the most used because they are concealible sp*. The average pistol price is about $500. Since the 1934 NFA act only two legal automatics were used in crimes. Both times by police officers. When was the last time you heard about an automatic being used? I remember two, one here one in California, both were illegal.

Actually, I am supporting the legalization of automatic weapons, which has absolutely nothign to do with the AWB.

They are legal, just HEAVILY regulated.

At 8/16/04 12:45 AM, Spookshow wrote:

They are legal, just HEAVILY regulated.

boils down to the same thing. unless a. the ATF likes me and b. i'm willing to give up any semblance of privacy i ever had or ever will have, it is illegal for me to own automatic weapons. i think the removal of the 1934 and 1968 laws would be a good thing.

At 8/16/04 01:16 AM, Einzelgaenger wrote: boils down to the same thing. unless a. the ATF likes me and b. i'm willing to give up any semblance of privacy i ever had or ever will have, it is illegal for me to own automatic weapons. i think the removal of the 1934 and 1968 laws would be a good thing.

I really don't think that John Q. Citizen needs a 50 cal emplacement in his living room to fight off a burglar. There should definately be some limitation if automatic weapons are to be legalized.

I think certain individuals should be allowed to own whatever they want sort of nukes. If I am mentally and financially sp* able to own a FA .50 cal, why not? Heck, there are people who own mini-guns.

For all you Pro- automatic weapon legalization people out there.

Name one time you would need an automatic weapon. As far as I can tell their only use is for killing large groups of people (which they were designed for). For hunting, etc. you dont need automatic weapons, grenade launchers, etc.

To fight the military and/or an oppressive government.

At 8/16/04 02:31 AM, Spookshow wrote: To fight the military and/or an oppressive government.

He makes a good point, that's what the right to bear arms was originally for. I don't think I'm going to have to make use of it in my lifetime, but it sure would be a nice option if the need arose.

It doesn't matter if you think I need a .50 caliber, or an assualt weapon, or a Barbie ad Ken Doll set. What matters is that I have the right to own them. If you don't like something then by all means don't buy/own it, but you have no right whatsoever to tell me what I can and can't have.

the diff. between a legal assult weapon and an illegal one, is: how it looks. thats it, thats how the ban was set up.

btw, go here: http://www.clintongunban.com/ that shows about the AWB (make sure ur popup blockers are off.)

sorry to say this mabzie, but i would take anything from the National Rifle Association about guns with a grain of salt.

good bye ban!

We have a right to defend ourselfs with any type of wepon the govt. or police have. YOU CANT TAKE A KNIFE TO A GUN FIGHT

CopKiller Ammo?! THat's HArdXXXCore, LOLZ0RZ. I gotta get me some of that.
People should be allowed to own all the Assualt Rifles they want. Cops are using rounds now that splinter into your body, and rounds with explosive tips that can blow your head clean off. We need to protect ourselves from the government.

I'd just like to point out that, with a little know-how, it's not that dificult to make a gas-ejector semi-automatic into a fully-automatic. Oh, and here's an excelent use of a firearm! I have a better pic, but i can't srink it so you can still read the dialog

Sam and Max. i haven't seen those guys in a while. what a great cartoon.

It's good to see that people are finally realizing this is a purely cosmetic ban and that we need to have the necessary tools to protect ourselves from any threat/

At 8/16/04 01:54 AM, Gunter45 wrote:

At 8/16/04 01:16 AM, Einzelgaenger wrote: boils down to the same thing. unless a. the ATF likes me and b. i'm willing to give up any semblance of privacy i ever had or ever will have, it is illegal for me to own automatic weapons. i think the removal of the 1934 and 1968 laws would be a good thing.

I really don't think that John Q. Citizen needs a 50 cal emplacement in his living room to fight off a burglar. There should definately be some limitation if automatic weapons are to be legalized.

I agree. No toys for convicted felons (at least violent ones) or the criminally insane. The current legislation on automatic weapons is draconian unless you have connections.

At 8/16/04 02:20 AM, LexanPhoenix wrote: For all you Pro- automatic weapon legalization people out there.

Name one time you would need an automatic weapon. As far as I can tell their only use is for killing large groups of people (which they were designed for). For hunting, etc. you dont need automatic weapons, grenade launchers, etc.

Yes, killing is their purpose. But such tools are necessary for effective defense against tyrrany. Muskets don't work anymore.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again, the 2nd amendment is about dealing with threats, both foreign and domestic, and not about the freedom to shoot bambi, though i fully support that right, too.

for the people who say "guns are not needed, there is no purpose for them" ok then who needs a 410HP corvette?? or a 500HP STR-10 truck?? or a suzuki 'busa with a top speed stock of just shy of the 200 mark..can't they walk or ride a bicycle?.. why do people need gas grill. cant they cook over an open wood fire?.. why do people need to eat at restraunts that the bill comes to more than i paid for my first car???can't they eat burgers and home made fries? wanna know why...THIS IS AMERICA we should have the freedoms to buy and do what we want when we want to(within reason)...

and who ever says assult weapons are for "spray and kill" must have never shot a gun before or even been in the presence of one before... 1 shot per 1 pull of the trigger.... if i just "sprayed bullets" when i went hunting you'd never hit anything.... a semi auto is excelent incase you didnt get a perfect clean kill and need to humanly and QUICKLY put a 2nd or 3rd shot in to put the aminal down..(i know of someone who had to put 5 slugs in a deer before it went down)..also no guns= minimal hunting(bow only) = over population and just about everything will get desiese and die off... oh and say good by to your outside cats and dogs.. cause the 'yots will get them... and about the only way to take a 'yot is with a rifle and maybe a slug shotgun since they get spooked and take off running...

what, and would you trust micheal moore(on)?

At 8/17/04 08:10 PM, mabzie wrote: what, and would you trust micheal moore(on)?

What does this have to do with the AWB?

At 8/17/04 08:54 PM, Spookshow wrote:

At 8/17/04 08:10 PM, mabzie wrote: what, and would you trust micheal moore(on)?

What does this have to do with the AWB?

fuck, i forgot the quote that goes to

At 8/17/04 04:25 AM, progun2themax wrote: for the people who say "guns are not needed"

who said guns werent needed? its about assault weapons, not all guns

:(i know of someone who had to put 5 slugs in a deer before it went down)
Jesus, what was he using, and how bad was his aim? you usually got one shot and thats it, how did he manage to put 5 in a deer? (really, im curious, dont mean to sound insulting)

the assult weapons ban diddent even ban guns. it banned features, such as bayonet lugs.

now, when has a bayonet lug ever killd someone?

At 8/17/04 09:01 PM, Raistlin230 wrote:

At 8/17/04 04:25 AM, progun2themax wrote: for the people who say "guns are not needed"

who said guns werent needed? its about assault weapons, not all guns

Assualt rifles and almost the same as regular semi-autos. Our point is it's COSMETIC. If you read the posts about HR 2038, it is about ALL guns. Why does someone need a 400 Hp Import?

(i know of someone who had to put 5 slugs in a deer before it went down)

Jesus, what was he using, and how bad was his aim? you usually got one shot and thats it, how did he manage to put 5 in a deer? (really, im curious, dont mean to sound insulting)

Probably a regular deer rifle. I've posted about people getting shot with 12 gauges, .45s, Rifles... Even a .22 point blank seven times, with the guy living.

5 times for a deer? what did he hit it in the feet?

At 8/17/04 09:41 PM, mabzie wrote: 5 times for a deer? what did he hit it in the feet?

Ever seen a deer get nailed by a truck and live? I could shoot you five times and if I didn't hit you in a vital area it will take awhile for you to bleed out. My GM was shot center of mass, point blank with a .45. It missed everything, including her heart.

I helped my brother track a buck for nearly half a mile that was shot in the chest with a 12 guage slug at about 30 yards. When we found it and opened it up, he had NO heart and NO lungs, but he ran all that distance.

There are already enough laws on the books to keep guns out of the hands of felons and such. Any law-abiding citizen should be able to purchase, use, and own any weapon that is currently available. We don't need more laws, we need effective enforcement of the laws on the books. Look at the studies done by Kleck, Lott, and others. Gun control laws have no effect, and in some places, the opposite effect on crime. (Places where gun control is strictest have the highest crime rates).

We need CRIMINAL control, not "gun" control. Most violnet felonies are committed by repeat hard-core criminals. More guns in the hands of citizens mean less crime. I said it before and I'll say it again. "Gun control" in not about guns or crime, it's about one group of people havig control over the rest of us.

At 8/17/04 09:39 PM, Spookshow wrote:

At 8/17/04 09:01 PM, Raistlin230 wrote:

At 8/17/04 04:25 AM, progun2themax wrote:

Probably a regular deer rifle. I've posted about people getting shot with 12 gauges, .45s, Rifles... Even a .22 point blank seven times, with the guy living.

Well i mean how as in, dont you usually get one shot off, and if that dosent kill or cripple it, you usually dont get another chance, unless you track it back down?