18 Children Dead in CT Mass Shooting

[FyredUp]

Trust me, I know the difference, the military has a way of doing that. But, when you have individuals that don't know the difference between an assault rifle and and a semi-automatic Remington bushmaster deer rifle, who am I to ruin the word dejour.
What ever you call them, there is a segment of population that believes they are the root of evil.

But just ask SC, it doesn't matter if you know what you are talking about. Just ban it.

[scfire86]

So tell me super genius, how did the AK-47 bank robbers continue OVER AND OVER AND OVER to successfully reload their weapons while being fired upon by a massively superior number of LEOs? And don't tell me it was because they were wearing body armor. Ask anyone who has taken a hit while wearing body armor, it is like getting punched or kicked. So let's hear it...HOW DID THEY DO IT?
Dunno. And I don't care. I never said my scenario was an absolute. I've stated repeatedly it was a possibility given that it has happened several times. Are you going to dispute that fact?


I'll tell you. The difference is familiarity with a weapon and practice based KNOWLEDGE of a weapon. I have never fired an M16/M4 in my life. I have held both a full auto military version and semi-auto civilian versions in my hands. I guarantee you I can load and fire that weapon and as long as nothing goes wrong, like a jam or some other failure I will do fine. But IF a failure of some sort occurs I will be in trouble because I am only familiar with that firearm, not knowledgeable on it. Now put one of MY firearms in my hands, some of which I have fired thousands of rounds down range with, and if a failure occurs I am well versed in that firearm and can generally in a matter of seconds be operational again.
Good for you. I'm happy you possess that skill. However, it doesn't change the REALITY of my claim. People have subdued the shooter during the interlude they were changing magazines.


Easy to act smug when you are so ignorant of the topic that you have nothing else. This nomenclature is VERY important and VERY critical when those pushing for new laws don't know the difference between a clip and a magazine, or an assault rifle and a military appearing semi-automatic rifle. Sad you are such an arrogant *** you can't admit you own ignorance and unwillingness to learn.
It's even easier to act smug when I'm watching you melt down over minutiae

I will use your line, "Please Proceed" to spew your ignorance because it is so damn easy to make you look foolish.
None of which changes the reality that no one but you cares about nomenclature when they are clamoring for policy shifts.


Facts, let's see that in hard facts. Otherwise it is unsubstantiated blather from you. And you have proven, other than snipets you have taken from the internet, your ignorance of this topic.

Of course they don't care because the truth is YOU and THEM want ALL THE GUNS and won't stop until you get them. Good luck because there are people far more ****ed off about this nonsense than myself and when confiscation, or registration begins it will not be pretty. Ignorance is bliss and you must be the happiest man alive when it comes to discussing gun control.
Where have I ever stated any such thing? Now you're just making things up to fit your narrative. However, there are probably just as many who are ****ed off about the possibility of them or their children being gunned down by someone who possesses the ability to shoot 30 rounds in less than 10 sec.


You had to look it up though didn't you? Sad...
So tell me Mr. Genieass. What did I use as a search term to have those search terms produce images similar to those? This should be fun.


And no matter how many times you say it you will never be right calling the Garand or the '03 Springfield assault rifles. I bet when you were a kid you put your fingers in your ears and tried to shout people down when they proved you wrong, heck I bet you do that today. BECAUSE NO MATTER HOW BADLY YOU WANT IT TO BE TRUE YOU ARE WRONG ABOUT THE GARAND AND THE '03 SPRINGFIELD.
Please proceed there Mr. F-U. No one besides you cares.

Well, sorry to tell you this but I believe you are lying right through your teeth. The term assault rifle came in to being late in the war when identifying the Sturmgewehr German rifle. Sad once again that history and the truth mean nothing to you.
See earlier response regarding the significance of nomenclature in this policy debate. The fact that you believe I'm lying bothers me to the point where I can't describe how it makes me feel.

Acting snotty and arrogant doesn't change how wrong you are.
Claiming I'm being any such thing doesn't change the debate regarding those who DO want all guns taken out of private hands. Something I've stated repeatedly that I don't favor.

This is a fun debate watching you slowly come unhinged.

[scfire86]

Enough said!

What the picture doesn't show is what it takes to do what she is doing. I doubt you would be in favor of all the hoops one must go through in Israel to be permitted to carry an M4.

[FyredUp]

This is a fun debate watching you slowly come unhinged.

Not unhinged at all. The fact that I can back everything I say and you choose to use big words to cover your ignorance of the topic is very telling.

You claim you aren't anti-gun and pro-ban yet everything you have said leads to believe you are. You follow in the footsteps of Feinstein and her crowd and believe that details mean nothing because a broad stroke ban covers everything. Including my little .22lr squirrel hunting rifle. Yepper, it has been listed as an "ASSAULT RIFLE" by one of her bills. You see details, nomenclature, minutiae, in the end do matter. In fact they are everything.

I would have far more respect for you if you admitted your ignorance of the topic, stopped making up BS stories about a WW2 vet calling the Garand and Springfield '03 assault rifles, and just admitted you favor restricting the rights of law abiding citizens in the ludicrous, unicorn, feel good, nonsensical belief that criminals give a flying crap about new laws. Hell man they don't enforce the laws we have and with the government being the largest illegal gun dealer in the world why would anyone but the delusional believe they will get it right this time?

But then again it is always easier to do something in a knee jerk manner than to actually look at the problem and address real solutions. You know, punish actual criminals and deal with the abysmal mental health problem in this country.

[scfire86]

Not unhinged at all. The fact that I can back everything I say and you choose to use big words to cover your ignorance of the topic is very telling.

Your increasingly hostile dialogue shows you are becoming unhinged. Sorry, I didn't realize I was using big words. There actually very common amongst people that have read books with no pictures in them.

You claim you aren't anti-gun and pro-ban yet everything you have said leads to believe you are. You follow in the footsteps of Feinstein and her crowd and believe that details mean nothing because a broad stroke ban covers everything. Including my little .22lr squirrel hunting rifle. Yepper, it has been listed as an "ASSAULT RIFLE" by one of her bills. You see details, nomenclature, minutiae, in the end do matter. In fact they are everything.

They only matter to folks like you. Hate to be a buzzkill. While there are a lot of guns in circulation, the majority of people in this country don't own guns and don't care about your pedantic demands.

I would have far more respect for you if you admitted your ignorance of the topic, stopped making up BS stories about a WW2 vet calling the Garand and Springfield '03 assault rifles, and just admitted you favor restricting the rights of law abiding citizens in the ludicrous, unicorn, feel good, nonsensical belief that criminals give a flying crap about new laws. Hell man they don't enforce the laws we have and with the government being the largest illegal gun dealer in the world why would anyone but the delusional believe they will get it right this time?

I would have far more respect for you when you recognize your argument over semantics isn't important to those who will determine policy. Ultimately, that is what is going to matter. Calling my WW II vet story BS is yet another indicator that you are arguing emotionally on this topic.

But then again it is always easier to do something in a knee jerk manner than to actually look at the problem and address real solutions. You know, punish actual criminals and deal with the abysmal mental health problem in this country.

Other countries allow firearms ownership and don't have the issue of frequent mass murder being committed with assault style weapons that occurs in the US. I believe we can learn from them and allow both to exist.

[FyredUp]

Your increasingly hostile dialogue shows you are becoming unhinged. Sorry, I didn't realize I was using big words. There actually very common amongst people that have read books with no pictures in them.

Really, a common word? Find me one other post on this entire sight with the word minutiae. Nice try, usually people that resort to the big word tactic realize they have lost the original argument.


They only matter to folks like you. Hate to be a buzzkill. While there are a lot of guns in circulation, the majority of people in this country don't own guns and don't care about your pedantic demands.

Your continued hanging on to saying details and proper names for types of weapons have no meaning shows how completely clueless, or probably more likely, how anti-gun you really are.


I would have far more respect for you when you recognize your argument over semantics isn't important to those who will determine policy. Ultimately, that is what is going to matter. Calling my WW II vet BS is yet another indicator that you are arguing emotionally on this topic.

Semantics means EVERYTHING when your rights are being attacked. If they were going to limit the 1st ammendment wouldn't you want to know what you weren't allowed to say, or read or watch anymore?

I never called your WWII vet BS, you may or may not know a WW2 vet. That to me is irrelevant. What is relevant is what I believe is a bald faced lie that a WWII vet called an M1 Garand and an '03 Springfield rifle an assault weapon. Because frankly that is as unbelievable as Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. It is simply NOT a term that was not applied to infantry weapons of any kind until the Sturmgewehr late in the war in Europe. So pardon me if I think your little story is fantasy.


Other countries allow firearms ownership and don't have the issue of frequent mass murder being committed with assault style weapons that occurs in the US. I believe we can learn from them and allow both to exist.

And until guys like you, with your heads buried in the sand, or elsewhere, realize that until the REAL issue of criminals and actual punishment, and this country's abysmal mental health care system are addressed in a meaningful manner these kinds of shootings will occur again. They will be followed by more meaningless, knee jerk, reactionary, feel good nothingness, that never really does a damn thing.

Like I said, just admit it and get it over with...

[scfire86]

Really, a common word? Find me one other post on this entire sight with the word minutiae. Nice try, usually people that resort to the big word tactic realize they have lost the original argument.
I didn't say it was a common word on this forum. You may not believe this, but there is a whole world outside of the firehouse.

Your continued hanging on to saying details and proper names for types of weapons have no meaning shows how completely clueless, or probably more likely, how anti-gun you really are.
Speaking metaphorically (is that too big a word for you as well?). If that is the hill you want to die on, trust me, you will die on it.

Semantics means EVERYTHING when your rights are being attacked. If they were going to limit the 1st ammendment wouldn't you want to know what you weren't allowed to say, or read or watch anymore?
Not a good analogy given the numerous restrictions to the 1st Amendment. Trying running through an airport with a backpack yelling, "I've got a bomb." I'm betting you'll be missing your flight and then some.

I never called your WWII vet BS, you may or may not know a WW2 vet. That to me is irrelevant. What is relevant is what I believe is a bald faced lie that a WWII vet called an M1 Garand and an '03 Springfield rifle an assault weapon. Because frankly that is as unbelievable as Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. It is simply NOT a term that was not applied to infantry weapons of any kind until the Sturmgewehr late in the war in Europe. So pardon me if I think your little story is fantasy.
I never said my WW II vet called an M1 Garand or Springfield assault weapons. I'm the one who stated both those weapons would have been considered the assault rifles of their day. You then claimed they were considered main battle rifles. That being the yardstick, I guess I could say the M4 is the present day main battle rifle given all three weapons systems were the primary issue to the troops that are doing the actual fighting. My WW II vet used the terms magazine and clip interchangeably. Once again your comprehension skills fail you. Reading, it's FUNdamental.

And until guys like you, with your heads buried in the sand, or elsewhere, realize that until the REAL issue of criminals and actual punishment, and this country's abysmal mental health care system are addressed in a meaningful manner these kinds of shootings will occur again. They will be followed by more meaningless, knee jerk, reactionary, feel good nothingness, that never really does a damn thing.Like I said, just admit it and get it over with...
Yet other countries don't have this issue. Certainly there is something we can learn from them since the status quo in our country isn't working.

I'll let you have the last word. This has been fun.

BTW, despite our differences on this issue. I will still be contributing something financially to kick Scott Walker's a** out of office next year. I hope the Dems put up a viable candidate.

[VinnieB]

Wow, what have I been missing!??!!?

[Rialaigh]

All I have to say on the topic of gun control is that I am sure that gun laws are not as restrictive as they should be. And I am sure that those who break current gun laws are not punished like they should be. I AM NOT in favor of banning broad classes of weapons. However, when I wanted to buy my first deer rifle, I was 21, I went to a big 2 day gun show in South Carolina near the NC border, I walked in on Sunday about 20 minutes before the end of the show. I found a nice Marlin .270 bolt action, brand new, that I really liked. I said I would take it, bought it from a guy who was an FFL, selling hundreds of guns there (everyone at the show was a dealer). I paid part cash, part credit card, never filled out an ounce of paper work, the guy never asked for an ID to see if I was old enough let alone even write down my name or drivers license number, from the time I said I would buy it till the time I walked out was less than 5 minutes. I know, from going to other gun shows and purchasing other guns that this is pretty standard for dealers that get lax.

Fact is, whether its a 10-22 or an M-4 or Glock 22, you should not be able to walk into somewhere and purchase ANY firearm (other than black powder weapons) without a background check, it's just stupid. Fix that and we can start to talk about other legislation.

[FyredUp]

All I have to say on the topic of gun control is that I am sure that gun laws are not as restrictive as they should be. And I am sure that those who break current gun laws are not punished like they should be. I AM NOT in favor of banning broad classes of weapons. However, when I wanted to buy my first deer rifle, I was 21, I went to a big 2 day gun show in South Carolina near the NC border, I walked in on Sunday about 20 minutes before the end of the show. I found a nice Marlin .270 bolt action, brand new, that I really liked. I said I would take it, bought it from a guy who was an FFL, selling hundreds of guns there (everyone at the show was a dealer). I paid part cash, part credit card, never filled out an ounce of paper work, the guy never asked for an ID to see if I was old enough let alone even write down my name or drivers license number, from the time I said I would buy it till the time I walked out was less than 5 minutes. I know, from going to other gun shows and purchasing other guns that this is pretty standard for dealers that get lax.

Fact is, whether its a 10-22 or an M-4 or Glock 22, you should not be able to walk into somewhere and purchase ANY firearm (other than black powder weapons) without a background check, it's just stupid. Fix that and we can start to talk about other legislation.

And I bought a shotgun, brand new in the box from a dealer at a gun show in Wisconsin and filled out paperwork and he called and did the criminal background check on me. Perhaps the gun show issue is a LOCAL state issue in YOU area. Fix YOUR state and stop making assumptions about everywhere based on your experience there.

I have NEVER, and I mean NEVER, bought a gun from an FFL licensed dealer that there wasn't paperwork and a background check involved.

[johnsb]

Wow, what have I been missing!??!!?

Well, SC has become the LA of gun control....

Yes, I just went there.

[Bones42]

And I bought a shotgun, brand new in the box from a dealer at a gun show in Wisconsin and filled out paperwork and he called and did the criminal background check on me...

He did all that before you left the show with the gun? Good to hear.

[SPFDRum]

All I have to say on the topic of gun control is that I am sure that gun laws are not as restrictive as they should be. And I am sure that those who break current gun laws are not punished like they should be. I AM NOT in favor of banning broad classes of weapons. However, when I wanted to buy my first deer rifle, I was 21, I went to a big 2 day gun show in South Carolina near the NC border, I walked in on Sunday about 20 minutes before the end of the show. I found a nice Marlin .270 bolt action, brand new, that I really liked. I said I would take it, bought it from a guy who was an FFL, selling hundreds of guns there (everyone at the show was a dealer). I paid part cash, part credit card, never filled out an ounce of paper work, the guy never asked for an ID to see if I was old enough let alone even write down my name or drivers license number, from the time I said I would buy it till the time I walked out was less than 5 minutes. I know, from going to other gun shows and purchasing other guns that this is pretty standard for dealers that get lax.

Fact is, whether its a 10-22 or an M-4 or Glock 22, you should not be able to walk into somewhere and purchase ANY firearm (other than black powder weapons) without a background check, it's just stupid. Fix that and we can start to talk about other legislation.

So 2 wrongs make a right and you allowing that behavior is nothing more than enabling an a perceived issue at that gun show in your state. I guess instead of coming on here and telling us how bad my state is or how bad the entire system is because of your instance, you should have reported it and got it solved. Smacks of a little of being hypocritical...

[scfire86]

Well, SC has become the LA of gun control....

Yes, I just went there.

Bad analogy. LAFE is committed to not doing the job of a firefighter. I've never advocated eliminating the private ownership of firearms.

[FyredUp]

He did all that before you left the show with the gun? Good to hear.

Yes, he did. And, it took less than 10 minutes to do.

[FyredUp]

Bad analogy. LAFE is committed to not doing the job of a firefighter. I've never advocated eliminating the private ownership of firearms.

Not openly...yet you have, because you called for banning assault rifles when in actuality what you want to ban is not even an assault rifle.

[scfire86]

Not openly...yet you have, because you called for banning assault rifles when in actuality what you want to ban is not even an assault rifle.

Really? Assault rifles as you define them are already prohibited from private ownership in most states. Please point me to where I've advocated banning semi-auto rifles, pistols, or shotguns.

[FyredUp]

Really? Assault rifles as you define them are already prohibited from private ownership in most states. Please point me to where I've advocated banning semi-auto rifles, pistols, or shotguns.

Um, duh? I TOLD YOU THAT! How nice that you finally have openly admitted I was right. Actually more factual is that if you have an Class 3 FFL you CAN own a fully automatic weapon, or assault weapon. They are HEAVILY regulated but they are legal to own if you are willing to jump through the right hoops and pay the tax to won one.

You can dance and sing and play your tamborine in your smoke screen all you want. You called for banning assault weapons and then called the M1 Garand, and the '03 Springfield bolt action rifle, assault weapons. So clearly you don't have one single clue what you are talking about.

[scfire86]

You can dance and sing and play your tamborine in your smoke screen all you want. You called for banning assault weapons and then called the M1 Garand, and the '03 Springfield bolt action rifle, assault weapons. So clearly you don't have one single clue what you are talking about.

Reading is not your strong suit. That much is obvious.

You continue to read what you want to see and not what is actually written.

[johnsb]

Reading is not your strong suit. That much is obvious.

You continue to read what you want to see and not what is actually written.

Well now let's not forget the topic of "high capacity magazines"....