Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 6/24/04 05:29 AM, NoHitHair wrote: That's...what, 13% or 14%? That's a LOT. Especially assault rifles - I don't consider that to be a small number, not in the least.

It's a lot of military-grade firearms, but it isn't "every household" by a longshot.

The site you provided was interesting reading, but full of flawed reasoning and logic. Examples:

It was the first site googled that gave what I needed. I should of just went back to their original sources, because I'm not going to bother defending that site.

why would u need an assault rifle

are u emplying, A. its pointless cause ppl will still have them

B. i think a handgun would do just fine in most cases

Waaaaaaaahhh.... Boohooo! Quit your whining! So what if Assault weapons are banned for civilian use! It's for a very good reason! What would you do with an Assault weapon anyways besides shoot people? If you want to use one just join the Army or Marines!

At 6/27/04 01:51 AM, silencedintruder wrote: go to Las Vegas. they sell combat mossburgs and silenced

MP5 s at the flea market.

but silencers are illegal for Civilian use in the United States!
Only government spies can use these!
I may have to report that to the FBI! hmm..maybe I'll get a medal or a reward for that! LOL!

At 6/23/04 09:38 PM, Quanze13 wrote:

Since we americans are lazy asses, if somebody took away guns, there would be less death.

Now, I don't believe your false statement! Americans in general are not lazy and ain't supposed to be lazy! Maybe you fat people are lazy! but I'm not! and I'm an American Citizen! Americans are hardworking and try their best to preserve and protect the freedom of the free world! They are also reknowned for their courage and bravery! I'm just ashamed of my generation!

At 6/28/04 01:45 AM, Alpha6 wrote:

At 6/23/04 09:38 PM, Quanze13 wrote:

Since we americans are lazy asses, if somebody took away guns, there would be less death.

Now, I don't believe your false statement! Americans in general are not lazy

I think it was meant more as a tongue-in-cheek statement, but it is a prevalent notion that Americans are lazy, despite the fact that Americans work longer hours than any other industrialized nation.

It's suprising we don't attack Germany, who has at best, more than 11% unemployment, with some places higher than 30%. Germany also offers unemployment benefits that offer paychecks for the rest of your life, only at a smaller percentage than what you'd actually make.

These unemployment benefits aren't only associated with Germany, but with many other European nations. Strange that Americans are just so darn "lazy".

At 6/29/04 01:27 AM, silencedintruder wrote: no buddy you are completly wrong. with BATF certafcation (4 forms to fill out at the gun store or flea market) anybody can get them in las vegas.

Sources. That's all we ever ask for - sources. Something to read. A nice story or two. Please.

Ok here goes.
For you sadly MISinformed people I must correct you.
The "Assualt Weapons Ban" is completely different than you think.
FYI.
1. Automatic weapons and SBR's (Short barreled rifles a.k.a. MP-5's) have been HEAVILY regulated since the National Firearms Act of 1934. They are not what the "ASB" banned.
2. The Gun Control Act of 1968 took care of silencers, grenade launcher, flame throwers, bazookas, etc. Including anything over .50 cal in rifles. Also silencers are ILLEGAL, NOISE SUPPRESSORS are not in 35 states. The must reduce noise but not under a certain percent.
3. The "Assualt Weapons" ban ONLY banned five things.
a. Bayonet lugs. Can you say "duct tape"?
b. Flash surppressors. Does nothing more than turns a BIG fireball into a small one. Play Golden eye for a good example. AK's DO NOT HAVE THESE!
c. The ability to accept a grenade launcher. Like I said, banned under the DD (Destructive Devices) act!
d. Collapsible or folding stocks. Again AK's and even MOST Ar-15's do NOT have these! It does'nt matter what kind of stock you have. I own several guns and IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO CONCEAL A RIFLE OR EVEN A SHOTGUN ON YOUR PERSON! Unless it is cut down in with you can do to almost any shotgun whether Military type or hunting! A Mossberg 590 (Military) type shotgun is almost 50 state legal as the ASB did not TOUCH PUMP ACTION SHOTGUNS. Most rifle's due to their actions CANNOT HAVE A FOLDING STOCK WITHOUT HEAVY MODIFICATION DUE TO THEIR MECHANISMS!
e. The ability to accept over 10 rounds. I have talked to many LAW ENFORCEMENT officers and they say this does NOT make a difference as most ASSUALTS AND FIRE FIGHTS do NOT last more than 10 rounds!!! It does not change the leathality of a gun! Getting shot with a .223 Ar-15 with a 30 round mag is the same as getting shot with a .223 Ar-15 with a 10 round mag. THE END RESULT IS THE SAME! I do not mean to upset ONLY educate. I am so tired of seeing people misinformed and I hope what I have said helps you all in learning what exactly you "hope" will pass. If you would like quotes or web sites as to the information I have provided please post and I will be glad to help you see the truth.

4. Ak-47's and Ak-74's (Civilian versions) do NOT usually have

At 7/1/04 11:22 PM, Spookshow wrote: d. Collapsible or folding stocks.

That would be so cool to walk around with a military assault rifle in your pants pocket. Just pop it out, let it fold itself out in a second, and voila - everyone knows you're packing serious heat.

On a sidenote, anyone else think those new U.S. military uniforms look...kinda...retarded?

At 7/2/04 03:55 AM, NoHitHair wrote:

At 7/1/04 11:22 PM, Spookshow wrote: d. Collapsible or folding stocks.

That would be so cool to walk around with a military assault rifle in your pants pocket. Just pop it out, let it fold itself out in a second, and voila - everyone knows you're packing serious heat.

On a sidenote, anyone else think those new U.S. military uniforms look...kinda...retarded?

Lol, my point is even WITH a folding or collapsible stock it is STILL an 8/9 pound 30" long weapon with a 30 (usually) round mag sticking out, kind of hard to conceal. I have a pistol grip shotgun and a trench coat, it is NOT possible to conceal it unless you saw off the barrel in which you would be a criminal (according to the US gov) and prob would not care anyways. Besides weapons like the KRINKOV (AKS-74U) are useless from and accuracy angle anyways... I mean 5" to 7" cannot and is not that accurate. Which uniforms? The Digital USMC camo was specially designed to blend in with certain things, esp cameras. Gay yes, effective also yes. The currently NEW USAF blue, green and gray camo was chosen for no other reason than the bike riders had nothing better to do and wanted to feel "special" from the other branches. FYI finishing a mistake, AK-47/74 do NOT usually have a flash supressor or collapsible stock. :)

We won the revolutionary war against trained British soldiers........

During WWII how far do you think the Nazis would have gotten if most of those countries had access to guns like we do?????

I own guns for one purpose...to protect my self, family, and friends from ignorant laws and people.

I am a good person and will not be unprepared...if the time comes when we have to use our guns...there will be a good reason.

And for people going nuts...Well some people are crazy. And if you wanna ban assault weapons. Dig this .22 handguns have more kills under their belts than any semi auto rifle. (Assault rifles are by definition full auto w/selector switch) The rifles sold in stores are just rifles w/various mag capacities.

a little pocket sized .22 handgun is what you need to worry about because if has the largest murder record of and gun (PERIOD!)

---Ignorance is fueled by Ignorance---

At 6/21/04 04:55 PM, mabzie wrote: its pointless.

instead of saying its merely pointles please try and go into more depth on why you believe so. i say its very important as assualt weapons have no function except death. im not liberl in anyway(socialist)but look at it logicaly. these weapons are not used for hunting. they cannot benefiet humans in anyway . only cause death and misery.

At 6/21/04 05:02 PM, mabzie wrote: So, let’s look at a few reasons that people own military style rifles.
The real question should be: Why wouldn’t you want to own one?

Because I don't want my neighbours having military style weapons. I tend to enjoy not having my ass capped from long distance and from accurate rapid fire.

At 7/7/04 03:36 PM, The_King_of_Wolves wrote:

At 6/21/04 05:02 PM, mabzie wrote: So, let’s look at a few reasons that people own military style rifles.
The real question should be: Why wouldn’t you want to own one?

Because I don't want my neighbours having military style weapons. I tend to enjoy not having my ass capped from long distance and from accurate rapid fire.

Let's see here, what do you consider long distance? A .223 and 7.62mm x 39mm are not really good for beyond about 200 yards. The ASB only touches Semi-autos, read the above post by me. A .300 Win. Mag. can kill you out to 800 yards accurately... Most .300's are in BOLT's NOT semi-autos. There are reasons why people have semi-autos. I love shooting them rather than bolts for many reasons. The recoil less, are more reliable, more ammunition is availible, and handle easier. I also am left handed, why should I have to pay $200 more for a bolt action I cannot use. Accurate rapid fire?... Have you ever even fired a gun? Even if you could shoot 30 rounds quickly, your fingers would be so tired by the point you got done, you'd reach muscle failure. I know I have tried it. Also fyi, look at places like Afgahnistan, The Russian Army had all modern automatic weapons, helicopters and tanks, the "muslim rebels" kicked their teeth in with only rpgs and 40 year old rifles! Look at the past before you comment on the present. And the MAJORITY of pro-second amendment people, do not RUN around with there guns. You are classifying about 80 millions people by the actions of about 1/2 of 1% of them. So let me ask you this, if the government were to take away all of your rights tomorrow. What would you do to save your family from oppression? Would you fight, or cower in your closet hoping the military, police or gun owners would save you?

At 7/7/04 03:27 PM, apfelsafat wrote:

At 6/21/04 04:55 PM, mabzie wrote: its pointless.

instead of saying its merely pointles please try and go into more depth on why you believe so. i say its very important as assualt weapons have no function except death. im not liberl in anyway(socialist)but look at it logicaly. these weapons are not used for hunting. they cannot benefiet humans in anyway . only cause death and misery.

Yes and the USSR also banned guns didn't they? Isn't socialism an off shoot of communism? That really worked out well for them didn't it? Oh wait that right millions of people died...If they would've had guns, they could have resisted... But no 40 years of cold war, millons of lives and trillions of dollars were wasted on a fruitless quest by two nations, communism in theory kind of works, but the truth is that there is no perfect form of government as people will always think differently from one another and the opression of one group of peoples ideas in favor of another is wrong. If you people want to ban guns, let the government run rampant, and generally be sheep who can only protest, I wish you the best of luck, If one day you are cowering in an alley somewhere and see a camouflaged "rebel" with an "assualt weapon" do not ask for his/her help as we tried to show you people the truth. You brought it on yourselfs. We tried to educate, we tried to show you the truth, but no more, you chose the path this country is taking. If the government does start oppressing you all, I feel confident and safe in the fact that I will not be a sheep, I will not back down, and I will NOT ever stop fighting for what I believe in. Believe what you want, I do nothing more than laugh at some of you people that are ignorant and only believe what some people say and what some of the media reports. I wish you all the best of luck protesting with cardboard pickett sign against the militarys weaponry. A 3' by 4' thin paper sign is no match for an M-16, or any other firearm for that matter. Ask the Chinese people who protested... OH WAIT!?! You can't, 20,000 of them died, what do you know, protesting without force does work, for the opressors that is. The truth is, as long as people exist we will always suffer from our faults, such as aggression, dishonesty and everything that is wrong with the world. We will always for as long as humanity exists need weapons of some type. They will not ever go away and I would feel a measure better knowing I can fight BACK, instead of give in and let them have what they want.

the AWB did nothing. it did not ban one single machine gun.

I would just like to say this: areas with strict gun control in general (not specifically assault rifles) have lower crime. Think about it from a criminal's point of view: are you going to rob a house that has a 40% chance of a weapon in it or a 5% chance. Criminals can always get guns.

At 7/9/04 08:17 PM, secondmessiah wrote: I would just like to say this: areas with strict gun control in general (not specifically assault rifles) have lower crime. Think about it from a criminal's point of view: are you going to rob a house that has a 40% chance of a weapon in it or a 5% chance. Criminals can always get guns.

dont you mean they have more crime?

At 7/9/04 08:21 PM, mabzie wrote:

At 7/9/04 08:17 PM, secondmessiah wrote: I would just like to say this: areas with strict gun control in general (not specifically assault rifles) have lower crime. Think about it from a criminal's point of view: are you going to rob a house that has a 40% chance of a weapon in it or a 5% chance. Criminals can always get guns.

dont you mean they have more crime?

Yeah, I was about to say... Look at Los Angeles... CA has a bunch of gun laws and look at the crime rate there. I mean the rioting alone...

At 7/9/04 08:17 PM, secondmessiah wrote: I would just like to say this: areas with strict gun control in general (not specifically assault rifles) have lower crime. Think about it from a criminal's point of view: are you going to rob a house that has a 40% chance of a weapon in it or a 5% chance. Criminals can always get guns.

By the way CA and Washington DC have the highest number of gun laws and also the Highest crime rates and suicides. Go figure.

Hey, should there be a ban on having neuclear weapons? (Sarcastic, if you didn't notice). What peeves me, is you can carry a loaded gun, but you can't carry a sword. Because I'm really going to rob a bank with a sword.

At 7/11/04 08:08 PM, AntiangelicAngel wrote: Hey, should there be a ban on having neuclear weapons? (Sarcastic, if you didn't notice). What peeves me, is you can carry a loaded gun, but you can't carry a sword. Because I'm really going to rob a bank with a sword.

I agree lol, the funny thing is alot of municiplalites allow open carrying of a loaded pistol (and sometimes a long firearm) i.e. carrying on on your hip outside of your jacket.... It is not usually a good idea because of the publics adept phobia of ANY form of weaponry. Say "gun" quietly in a mall for a good example. Lol I almost got arrested several times because I wear camo and alot of field gear when I go camping.

Well on the one hand banning assault weapons makes sense in that people shouldn;t need them, I say forget about it cause it's unenforceable. I know someone with 3 assault grade rifles on his wall. Think hes gonna give up cause we tell him?

At 7/11/04 11:22 PM, witeshark wrote: Well on the one hand banning assault weapons makes sense in that people shouldn;t need them, I say forget about it cause it's unenforceable. I know someone with 3 assault grade rifles on his wall. Think hes gonna give up cause we tell him?

No we should not need them but for as long as people exist. So will distrust. I think we should always have a way to fight back. Besides I would like to hear some peoples explaination of what the difference (in leathality) is between a Post-Ban AR-15 and a Pre-Ban AR-15, both are semi-auto, both have the same firing rate, both can have the same magazine capacity. Same weight, same barrels (depending on model), FACE IT PEOPLE THE LAW IS JUST COSMETIC! I am responsible with my equipment and think I should be allowed to own something like that. If only because it looks nice. I stopped questioning a long time ago why certain groups buy cosmetic only things. Like Imports for instance. I.e. Spinners, they are dangerous. In the sense that that distract a driver from driving. A shiny spinning object is designed to attract attention. Should we ban those next? And no we will not give up just because someone like Feinstein or McCarthy tells us to.

At 7/7/04 03:24 PM, PalmClease wrote: We won the revolutionary war against trained British soldiers........

During WWII how far do you think the Nazis would have gotten if most of those countries had access to guns like we do?????

I own guns for one purpose...to protect my self, family, and friends from ignorant laws and people.

I am a good person and will not be unprepared...if the time comes when we have to use our guns...there will be a good reason.

And for people going nuts...Well some people are crazy. And if you wanna ban assault weapons. Dig this .22 handguns have more kills under their belts than any semi auto rifle. (Assault rifles are by definition full auto w/selector switch) The rifles sold in stores are just rifles w/various mag capacities.

a little pocket sized .22 handgun is what you need to worry about because if has the largest murder record of any gun (PERIOD!)

---Ignorance is fueled by Ignorance---

No one replied to my post???

I say again why ban semi automatic rifles w/30rd mags. When a little pocket sized .22 handgun is what you need to worry about because if has the largest murder record of any gun in America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (PERIOD!)

If America is at war with Terror...Why take our guns????????

---Ignorance is fueled by Ignorance---

All of my replies take in everything in between what I said in my last post to when I log on again. I commented on your post when I talked about of all gun crimes assualt weapons were only used in 1% :)

At 7/14/04 05:28 PM, Spookshow wrote: All of my replies take in everything in between what I said in my last post to when I log on again. I commented on your post when I talked about of all gun crimes assualt weapons were only used in 1% :)

Good man

assult weapons are good, but greedy corporations have cashed in on it

At 7/14/04 05:44 PM, Morextremist wrote: assult weapons are good, but greedy corporations have cashed in on it

How so? Most of the people who make modification to resemble military weapons I.e. the M-4 (AR-15) stocks and alot of the "tri-rail" accessory mounts are made by small corporations. I agree that they do charge a large amount for some of these items ($100-400) for just a stock alone. A fully finished gun may cost up to $8,000... Well, crap. I guess your right... :)

Latest news from Washington!!!

Monday, July 12, 2004

Congratulations!

Through your efforts, you have succeeded in killing the best opportunity that anti-gunners had to extend the ban on roughly two hundred semiautomatic firearms.

Liberals had intended to offer the semi-auto ban as a "killer amendment" to class action reform legislation which was considered by the Senate last week. At first, there was every indication that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist was going to allow anti-gunners like Sen. Feinstein to offer the gun ban amendment.

But after you bombarded Frist's office with demands that he prevent the semi-auto amendment, Frist -- in a parliamentary move that we suggested -- took steps to procedurally block all "killer amendments," including the semi-auto ban.

Liberal anti-gunners whined and screamed on the Senate floor, and threatened to kill the class action bill in retaliation. But we appear to have won the battle for now, as the class action bill has been pulled from the floor.

This victory is huge. Compared to the ill-fated strategy used on the gun makers' protection act (S. 1805) earlier in the year, the outcome on the class action bill was as good as could be expected in the poisoned environment on the Hill. Consider the following:

* The best chance for reenacting the semi-auto ban prior to its September 13 expiration is now dead;
* Unlike the gun liability bill -- defeated 8-to-90 in March after it was loaded down with "killer amendments" -- pro-business Senators can still bring the class action bill back up at some later point during this session;
* Unlike with the gun liability bill, the class action bill did not offer anti-gun Democrats a week of Senate floor time to promote their agenda; and
* Those anti-gunners who cynically pretended to support the class action bill were forced to make a choice between politically powerful constituencies -- between the pro-business community and the trial lawyers.