Like Tree279Likes

Thread: 18 Children Dead in CT Mass Shooting

  1. #526
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Then let's get rid of speeding laws, since they won't stop people from speeding.

    Never said to eliminate current laws. Enforcing them strictly on criminals, and not adding more to law abiding citizens is my complaint.

    Let's get rid of DUI laws since they won't stop people from drinking and driving.

    The fact that we see day after day after day about people with 3,4,5...10, 11 DUI convictions caught driving drunk again proves we don't take drunk driving punishment seriously enough.

    Let's get rid of all drug laws since they won't stop people from using drugs.

    The war on drugs has failed miserably. We need to change tactics and not having our president supporting giving guns to Mexican drug cartels would be an excellent place to start.

    Your logic is we should do nothing since nothing is 100%.

    Nope my logic is quite simple. Punish criminals harshly enough that it actually means something. Stop writing new laws to punish law abiders and instead punish the law breakers. You see how simple my logic is? Do I need poster board and some crayons to help you draw that out?
    Try again, you seem to be faltering...
    Chenzo likes this.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  2. #527
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    Funny you bring prohibition up. How well did banning alcohol work for this country? Oh that's right, it didn't. All you saw with prohibition was a spike in illegal alcohol manufacturing, trafficking, and sales.

    And as far as your so called "slipper slope" argument. Look at history in other countries. It all starts somewhere.
    Actually, prohibition led to the greatest growth is organized crime and violence. including murder, in the history of the United States. The exact same thing that will happen if a gun "Prohibition" is enacted.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  3. #528
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I agree. However, pro-gun enthusiast Alex Jones didn't do gun owners any favors when he went on a tirade on national TV ranting about 1776 coming again if someone comes to take his guns. My point is folks like him use the need to defend themselves from an oppressive government that is using force to take away their freedom(s). Given they would be up against the modern US military (assuming the military would be willing to turn on the citizenry), they would be run over pretty quickly.

    First off, Alex Jones can't be compared to your average gun owner. He is a conspiracy theorist nut job, and does not represent the bulk of gun owners in America.

    Secondly, why do you think they invited Alex Jones on the show? Because they knew he would go ballistic, as he always does. Funny you don't mention other interviews that have taken place, where the pro-gun guests have remained calm and rational in their arguments, while the host goes ballistic.

    Like this one, where he interviews Larry Pratt and Piers Morgan calls Larry Pratt an "Unbelievably stupid man"
    http://youtu.be/RC4JJWUtzkc

    Or this one where Joshua Boston remains calm and rational.
    http://youtu.be/iSrvua88lMA

    Or this one, again, where the guest presents calm, rational arguments
    http://youtu.be/ECxDvwObwZk

    And therein lies your, and every other anti-gun lobbyist's, problem. They never seem to quote the interviews or articles where the guess presents calm, rational facts even though the host is attempting to incite an emotional response.
    DeputyMarshal likes this.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  4. #529
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Gawd your stupidity continues to shine brightly. What rights am I demanding be limited?
    My right, LA's right, any other law abiding citizens right to own a 25, 30, 50, etc round magazine. There's no reason that I or anyone else who is a law abiding citizen to be prohibited from owning a magazine that holds more than ten rounds. I'm not a criminal. My guns aren't used for criminal activity, nor will the ever be.


    So what? This point is irrelevant. Being an expert in a field's terminology isn't a requirement to make law.
    And that's what they want. Broad definitions so that everything will be covered and included in any ban or regulation. Sorry that several of us believe the definitions regarding our rights being infringed should come from an expert, and not Joe Blow on the street


    Other countries would disagree with you. They have models that work. But it would require that people like you read books that have no pictures in them to know that.
    Here you are back to the insults. The tactic you regularly go back to when you have no legitimate argument against a point someone just made


    Spellcheck is your friend. Use it. You obviously need it for words larger than at least three letters.
    To quote one of your most used lines on here, "See post above"
    You've got to realize how far off base you are when SO MANY PEOPLE who regularly disagree with LA, have been agreeing with his posts.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  5. #530
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Actually, prohibition led to the greatest growth is organized crime and violence. including murder, in the history of the United States. The exact same thing that will happen if a gun "Prohibition" is enacted.
    I appreciate the extra information. It only reinforces the point I was making.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  6. #531
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    First off, Alex Jones can't be compared to your average gun owner. He is a conspiracy theorist nut job, and does not represent the bulk of gun owners in America.

    Secondly, why do you think they invited Alex Jones on the show? Because they knew he would go ballistic, as he always does. Funny you don't mention other interviews that have taken place, where the pro-gun guests have remained calm and rational in their arguments, while the host goes ballistic.

    Like this one, where he interviews Larry Pratt and Piers Morgan calls Larry Pratt an "Unbelievably stupid man"
    http://youtu.be/RC4JJWUtzkc

    Or this one where Joshua Boston remains calm and rational.
    http://youtu.be/iSrvua88lMA

    Or this one, again, where the guest presents calm, rational arguments
    http://youtu.be/ECxDvwObwZk

    And therein lies your, and every other anti-gun lobbyist's, problem. They never seem to quote the interviews or articles where the guess presents calm, rational facts even though the host is attempting to incite an emotional response.
    Or when Ted Nugent actually supplies statistics that Peirs couldn't argue. While it's only made headlines and garnered attention lately, it was almost a year ago he did so.
    Chenzo likes this.

  7. #532
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Or when Ted Nugent actually supplies statistics that Peirs couldn't argue. While it's only made headlines and garnered attention lately, it was almost a year ago he did so.
    Very true, I forgot about that one.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  8. #533
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    Very true, I forgot about that one.
    I find him to be a bit over the top for my taste, but the man is intelligent and had his facts when he went on that show. We sat down at work the other day and watched the entire interview, not just the portions you typically see, and were all quite impressed. He made very valid arguments and backed them up with statistics.

  9. #534
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Those are all good points and I agree with you. I find it hilarious that many of the pro-gun-nut folks out there are focusing on Obama. The gun issue has never been of much interest to him during his presidency. It's not been any sort of a policy issue of his administration in the least. The only reason now that he is acting is that the American people themselves have become motivated to work on the problem. He's not initiating this interest in gun control laws, he's just following the lead of a large portion of the citizenry. Something a president is supposed to do.
    I'm tired of the gun control conversation since everybody is pretty much repeating the same stuff over and over. I'm not sure why I even dropped back in for a look. Probably because I'm sitting here watching an episode of Emergency and this is the only active thread that isn't about hiring or testing right now.

    At any rate, I thought I'd comment on your statement that gun control hasn't been on the President's agenda. I thought all through the first term that gun control and a few other controvercial items were on his agenda, but he knew that forcing the issue would hurt his re-election efforts. I think he stayed away from these items in the first term with full intention of putting them out on the table in this term. I think the shooting just moved up his timetable. Obviously, this is just my opinion and isn't worth arguing.
    Last edited by tbzep; 01-16-2013 at 05:41 PM.

  10. #535
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    I find him to be a bit over the top for my taste, but the man is intelligent and had his facts when he went on that show. We sat down at work the other day and watched the entire interview, not just the portions you typically see, and were all quite impressed. He made very valid arguments and backed them up with statistics.
    I will agree, Ted Nugent can be, has been, and will continue to be a little over the top. However, he comes to the table with facts to back up his statements. He can be fanatical at times, but I've never seen him get Alex Jones "IT'S 1776 ALL OVER AGAIN" fanatical. (Which is exactly why Jones was invited on the Piers Morgan Show. To make gun owners look insane)
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  11. #536
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    I will agree, Ted Nugent can be, has been, and will continue to be a little over the top. However, he comes to the table with facts to back up his statements. He can be fanatical at times, but I've never seen him get Alex Jones "IT'S 1776 ALL OVER AGAIN" fanatical. (Which is exactly why Jones was invited on the Piers Morgan Show. To make gun owners look insane)
    Personally I think Ted Nugent is NOT a good spokeman for the pro-gun side of this debate. Why? Because of his over the top antics. I think the last thing the pro-gun side needs is the image of a wildman with a gun yelling about killing animals and saying he wants all criminals dead.

    NO, I am not saying hunting is bad or that defending yourself is wrong. But you can project a calm rationale image supporting both of those or look like a lunatic and drive as many people away as you pull in.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  12. #537
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,596

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Gawd your stupidity continues to shine brightly. What rights am I demanding be limited?

    The right to own any gun I want short of a fully automatic weapon. The right to acquire that weapon as a law abiding citizen without a mountain of paperwork. And the right to purchase any size magizine that my law abiding heart desires.

    The fact is there are hundreds of ways to kill folks and we are not banning baseball bats (which is the number one weapon used in murders, by the way), pipe wrenches, gasoline and matches, knives and all other sorts of everyday killers.



    So what? This point is irrelevant. Being an expert in a field's terminology isn't a requirement to make law. You should reread the Constitution you claim to love so much. Be prepared. There are no pictures and they used really big words.

    You want to ban something you need to be VERY, VERY specific about the exact specifications of the items you want to ban. Most anti-gun folks have no idea that a semi-automatic is not, never has been and never will be an assualt weapon, even though it may be dressed up like military style fully automatic. Yes, I want the folks who want to be ban guns to be very specific about what they want to ban using terminology that is used in the industry, not from a dictionary.


    Ha ha ha. Says a lot about his opponent's capability that he got beat by someone you perceive as a village idiot. You must believe his opponent was even more of an idiot given that Obama beat him.....handily.

    I could talk about the gross lie's and misrepresentations used by the village idiot and his cronnies but I won't. The joke of a president lied over and over about Romney's positions and unfortunately, Romney's handlers weren't skilled enough to reply.

    Funny thing is I have a map in my office from USA Today and the VAST majority of the county's in this country voted for Romney. If you look at where the village moron got his votes it was in the urban and high hispanic areas with those that live off our money - government handoffs and entitlements. Funny how that works when you basically support folks and buy votes.



    Other countries would disagree with you. They have models that work. But it would require that people like you read books that have no pictures in them to know that.

    Sorry but we have a much higher murder rate overall than just about any country, so this isn't about guns. And the VAST majority of the murders that do occur with guns occur with handguns, which are not on the table for discussion. Less than 5% of the gun murders use rifles of any type, and most of those are standard hunting rifles.

    If somebody wants to kill someone, they will find a way as I discussed earlier. The fact is that we kill people in this country at a much higher rate than anywhere else. It isn't a gun problem. It's a murder problem.



    Spellcheck is your friend. Use it. You obviously need it for words larger than at least three letters.
    Funny thing is that it really won't matter how we spell it. The point is that are rights are being taken away at an alarming rate. Soon we may be saying it.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  13. #538
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Personally I think Ted Nugent is NOT a good spokeman for the pro-gun side of this debate. Why? Because of his over the top antics. I think the last thing the pro-gun side needs is the image of a wildman with a gun yelling about killing animals and saying he wants all criminals dead.
    I can understand that, however he's certainly not comparable to Alex Jones. Honestly, the two best "spokesmen" who have come out of this in my opinion are Larry Pratt and Joshua Boston. They've remained calm, and stuck to the facts even when a host has tried to incite an emotional reaction from them. Calm, cool, collected.
    Ted Nugent can absolutely come over the top, but he's definitely not Alex Jones crazy.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  14. #539
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    Ted Nugent can absolutely come over the top, but he's definitely not Alex Jones crazy.
    I stand by my opinion. He is a screamer and a wildman and when people think of him they think of the wildman, not the rational guy that can beat you with logic and statistics.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  15. #540
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,682

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    The right to own any gun I want short of a fully automatic weapon. The right to acquire that weapon as a law abiding citizen without a mountain of paperwork. And the right to purchase any size magizine that my law abiding heart desires..
    The right to own any gun except a fully automatic weapon (cuz that right has already been taken away - I guess by an amendment to the bill of rights?)

    The right to acquire a weapon without doing paperwork? Sorry, freedom of paperwork is not a right. You still have the right to acquire a weapon so NOTHING is being taken away.

    You are correct, the right to purchase any size magazine would be restricted (kind of like the fully automatic restriction you mentioned already)


    "The point is that are rights are being taken away at an alarming rate." - I have to ask...what rights are being taken away at alarming rates? More directly...what rights have been taken away since Jan 1, 2012? There must be quite a few if it's an alarming rate.
    bcjack likes this.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  16. #541
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Poconos, Pa
    Posts
    796

    Default

    A AR- type semi auto weapon is like... A Ben II helmet.. Looks traditional, is cheaper.... But just isn't the real thing.

    Why do you drive a car that goes over 55mph? Why do you eat at fast food restaurants? Why do you have 200 channels on your TV? Because you can. Because you can afford to, because you aren't an incarcerated criminal.

    Why do people own 40,000 fishing boats, why do people sky dive, smoke, and drink? Because they can, they can afford to, they want to and are not incarcerated criminals..

    Why should people be able to own an AR type rifle? Because they can, because they want to, because they can afford it... And because they aren't incarcerated criminals.

    See the trend? Govt doesn't tell you don't by the corvette that goes 140mph, that a 16 year old with a dvr's liscense can drive no questions asked.. Govt doesn't tell me I can't own a ranger bass boat with a 200hp motor that can go 80mph that ANYONE can operate. See the trend?

    Govt tells us don't drink and drive, it's a law.. How is that working?
    Govt tells us don't murder, rape and steal..it's a law. How's that working?
    Govt tells us don't use drugs.. There are laws.. How's that working?

    I don't know what else to say..if we can kill babies legally, why is everyone upset about a couple 6 year olds? If we can kill a couple hundred kids over in the Middle East, no one cares about that though..
    I'm sure there are plenty of inner city murders involving kids all across the country.
    Gas is almost 4.00 a gallon, we are in so much debt it's not even funny, we are divided as a country.. There are no jobs.... How about we fix some of those issues or discuss that before we talk about banning 30 round "magazine clips" because magazine clips don't even exist.
    Chenzo and bcjack like this.

  17. #542
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Poconos, Pa
    Posts
    796

    Default

    Why are we not banning cell phones? How many people died today because of texting/ driving? Why are we not in an uproar over that issue? Why are we not pushing for bans on alcohol and tobacco? How many people died from smoking related cancers? Or drunk drivers/alcohol related illnesses? How many violent crimes were committed today using something other then a gun? I can't understand why people aren't jumping on the ban cell phones, cigarettes, and beer?

    There are so much deeper problems here besides guns.. And everyone here knows it. And if you are on the pro gun side you are labeled as a gun nut, lunatic, uneducated, and heartless because how could you not want to prevent further deaths of innocent children from happening.

    I just don't understand. We can what if the situation to death....
    Chenzo and bcjack like this.

  18. #543
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    If the President hired mercenaries, "OH WAIT they call them PRIVATE CONTRACTORS," what makes you believe they wouldn't have access to any, and all, weaponry currently in the inventory of the US Military? Hell, Mr Executive order could make it happen with a stroke of his pen, he does have a history of bypassing the legislature when they tell him no.
    I don't know. It's your scenario. Not mine. I stated a group of folks armed with AR-15's wouldn't stand a chance against the modern US military. You're the one that has concocted the contractor scenario.


    Again your lack of any real knowledge on insurgency and guerilla warfare is absolutely laughable. The Russians were driven out of Afghanistan by essentially a Third World bunch of rebels. These rebels did use AK-47s, and other modern small arms, but many of then were armed with surplus WW2 bolt action rifles, and some even had muskets. The Russians had tanks, and airplanes, and nuclear subs, as well as advanced surveilance equipment and still lost. In fact, much of that same technology is still being used to kill US troops after a decade of fighting. Why haven't we utterly wiped them out with all of our technology?
    Here's the difference. The Russians (like us) were not willing to attack the civilian populations because there was a desire to gain the support of them at some point in time. We haven't utterly wiped them out because we have a desire and policy to pursue those who are specifically our enemy. That wouldn't be the case here. Since the civilians are the armed combatants. Please detail for us your extensive personal experience with insurgency and guerilla warfare. I can't wait. One last point. The Afghans, the Vietnamese, and those that fought us in Iraq all had support from outside their country either in direct arms or money to finance their rebellion. The American colonials had significant assistance from the French to the point where many historians believe they would have failed were it not for that assistance. Which outside nation is going going to aid this militia force and how are they going to supply them?

    You fail to see that people defending their homeland will pay a VERY heavy price to protect it. Look back through history, the American Revolution, Viet Nam War, the Afghanies fighting through history against numerous invaders., just to name a few. The American people, at least some of them anyway, will do exactly the same and it will be very costly to whomever wishes to try and conquer us and destroy our freedom.
    I can also point to despots that have come to power via the military might of their nation. In this case, the troops wouldn't be the invaders.

    Before you diverted you ranted on and on about assault rifles, until myself and others here showed you what an completely uninformed buffoon you truly are on the topic of firearms nomenclature.
    Yawn.....

    You are anti-gun alright and not diversions by you into labeling me and others as paranoid will hide that. You are an appeaser and that Neville, is worse than just admitting you are anti-gun.
    Your writings prove my point.

    Just admit it...It won't change how anyone here feels about you. But then again the truth isn't the tool of ultra lefties is it?
    Lol.
    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    The truth is you have been proven wrong so many times on this topic that you have nothing left but diversion.
    The only one diverting is you by claiming I'm anti gun and have yet to prove it.

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    You can't properly identify the firearms you want to control.
    I have according to a generally accepted dictionary whose function is word definitions.

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    You have absolutely no knowledge of the FFL licensing system and the Class 3 license that DOES in fact allow private ownership of fully automatic firearms if you are willing to do the mountain of paperwork and pay the fees.
    And could care less since I have no interest in owning one. I do know I've had to fill out paperwork to own my firearms.

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    When you realized you were losing you brought in an irrelevant firearms incident and played the race card.
    The point was completely lost on you. The point was the difference in reaction to two unarmed individuals (or group) that was gunned down by an armed person. You claimed Zimmerman was defending himself when he confronted Martin because Zimmerman believed Martin was doing something illegal. Something no one has yet to prove.

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    You claimed the governemt controls how many potato chips you can buy and how you can use them.
    Actually I claimed the government has extensive regulations regarding their production. Feel free to reread those posts.

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    You tried, failing miserably, to draw a comparison between explosives and firearms.
    Wrong again. I stated there were things that some might use responsibly but that didn't stop the government from making their possession illegal. You really do have a difficult time with comprehension.

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    I have to say your posts on this topic make me smile becuse they are utter nonsense.
    Same here. Your paranoiac ramblings are being more self evident.

    Once again. Show me a link to where I have advocated eliminating the private ownership of firearms. You keep making these fantastic claims about me with nothing other than your paranoia. Please proceed.
    Last edited by scfire86; 01-17-2013 at 12:11 PM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  19. #544
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    First off, Alex Jones can't be compared to your average gun owner. He is a conspiracy theorist nut job, and does not represent the bulk of gun owners in America.
    Given that I've never advocated eliminating the private ownership of firearms, I can tell by the responses on this Board that he has a lot of company.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  20. #545
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    The right to own any gun I want short of a fully automatic weapon. The right to acquire that weapon as a law abiding citizen without a mountain of paperwork. And the right to purchase any size magizine that my law abiding heart desires.
    I disagree. One has to go through a lot of hoops to own and operate a car. It hasn't stopped people from buying them.

    The fact is there are hundreds of ways to kill folks and we are not banning baseball bats (which is the number one weapon used in murders, by the way), pipe wrenches, gasoline and matches, knives and all other sorts of everyday killers.
    When was the last time someone walked into a school or theater and mowed down 30 people with a pipe wrench, gasoline and matches, or a knife? A stupid comparison. Epic fail.

    You want to ban something you need to be VERY, VERY specific about the exact specifications of the items you want to ban. Most anti-gun folks have no idea that a semi-automatic is not, never has been and never will be an assualt weapon, even though it may be dressed up like military style fully automatic. Yes, I want the folks who want to be ban guns to be very specific about what they want to ban using terminology that is used in the industry, not from a dictionary.
    I am. Magazines with a capacity larger than 10 rounds. BTW, does your scenario include those weapons that are easily converted to full automatic capability?

    I could talk about the gross lie's and misrepresentations used by the village idiot and his cronnies but I won't. The joke of a president lied over and over about Romney's positions and unfortunately, Romney's handlers weren't skilled enough to reply.
    So you're saying Obama's cronies outsmarted Romney and his handlers? Says a lot about them. Given that they lost, they must have been dumber than the person you perceive as an idiot.

    Funny thing is I have a map in my office from USA Today and the VAST majority of the county's in this country voted for Romney. If you look at where the village moron got his votes it was in the urban and high hispanic areas with those that live off our money - government handoffs and entitlements. Funny how that works when you basically support folks and buy votes.
    Actually numbnuts, the majority of this country voted for Obama. The maps you referenced are geographical area. Those will be relevant the day dirt becomes a registered voter. Again, epic fail.

    Sorry but we have a much higher murder rate overall than just about any country, so this isn't about guns. And the VAST majority of the murders that do occur with guns occur with handguns, which are not on the table for discussion. Less than 5% of the gun murders use rifles of any type, and most of those are standard hunting rifles.
    However, we have a significantly higher murder rate by guns than just about any other industrialized nation. So this is about guns.

    If somebody wants to kill someone, they will find a way as I discussed earlier. The fact is that we kill people in this country at a much higher rate than anywhere else. It isn't a gun problem. It's a murder problem.
    No kidding. But if they don't have a semi-auto weapon that can fire 30 rounds in less than a 30 secs., it is much more difficult for them to kill numerous people in a very short period of time.

    Funny thing is that it really won't matter how we spell it. The point is that are rights are being taken away at an alarming rate. Soon we may be saying it.
    More paranoia from planet wingnuttia.
    You continue to show your stupidity on any number of topics with this one.
    Last edited by scfire86; 01-17-2013 at 09:16 AM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  21. #546
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    No it isn't. Law abiding gun owners will still be able to own guns.
    You forgot the Asterisk. You know, the part where you say that sure, you can own a gun, but it has to look like Elmer Fudd's so it's not too scary looking, and you can only have one bullet in your pocket like Barney Fife.

    Any gun can kill, and limiting what gun or accessory a law abiding person can have IS punishing legal gun owners. Stop tap dancing.
    Chenzo likes this.

  22. #547
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    Funny you bring prohibition up. How well did banning alcohol work for this country? Oh that's right, it didn't. All you saw with prohibition was a spike in illegal alcohol manufacturing, trafficking, and sales.

    And as far as your so called "slipper slope" argument. Look at history in other countries. It all starts somewhere.
    On a related note, mass murder by firearm peaked during prohibition as well.
    Chenzo likes this.

  23. #548
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRJ0...e_gdata_player
    More facts, but I'm sure it will fall on deaf ears to some. Even though every fact stated can be varified. Since every post I typed with numbers/facts had linked references, I would have expected an intelligent person to look that information up and put forth a counter-point negating those facts.
    But nope, instead you get lip service bs; we should eliminate DUI laws because people still drink and drive, can't drive a NASCAR on the hi-way, grenade launchers, etc.
    Last edited by SPFDRum; 01-17-2013 at 11:09 AM.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  24. #549
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,596

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigGriffC12 View Post
    Why are we not banning cell phones? How many people died today because of texting/ driving? Why are we not in an uproar over that issue? Why are we not pushing for bans on alcohol and tobacco? How many people died from smoking related cancers? Or drunk drivers/alcohol related illnesses? How many violent crimes were committed today using something other then a gun? I can't understand why people aren't jumping on the ban cell phones, cigarettes, and beer?

    There are so much deeper problems here besides guns.. And everyone here knows it. And if you are on the pro gun side you are labeled as a gun nut, lunatic, uneducated, and heartless because how could you not want to prevent further deaths of innocent children from happening.

    I just don't understand. We can what if the situation to death....
    That was my point to SC with a previous post.

    If he, and the anti-gun folks are so concerned about kids dying from being shot, why aren't they just as concerned with the causes of child death that are much larger than shootings ever will be. Why are they not in an uproar demanding bans and legislation regulating pools, bikes, 4-wheelers, trampolines, bath tubs and the many other ways that kids die every damn day.

    He didn't answer.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  25. #550
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    The right to own any gun except a fully automatic weapon (cuz that right has already been taken away - I guess by an amendment to the bill of rights?)

    WRONG!! It is entirely possible to own fully automatic firearms if you are willing to jump through the hoops of getting a Federal firearms License Class 3. It is a mountain of paperwork, background checks, additional fees and a tax stamp from the federal government. But the truth is you couldn't possibly be more wrong about this.

    Once again your ignorance of federal gun laws make you look like nothing more than a mouthpiece for the anti-gun crowd. Nice try but FACTS out weigh your propaganda.


    The right to acquire a weapon without doing paperwork? Sorry, freedom of paperwork is not a right. You still have the right to acquire a weapon so NOTHING is being taken away.

    Actually, anytime you buy a gun from a licensed FFL dealer, at least in Wisconsin anyways, you MUST fill out paperwork. No law is going to prevent criminals from acquiring guns illegally and without paperwork. You are delusional beyond all hope if you believe otherwise.

    You are correct, the right to purchase any size magazine would be restricted (kind of like the fully automatic restriction you mentioned already)

    Actually your comparison is faulty since I already proved you are WRONG in your belief that private citizens can't purchase and own fully automatic weapons. Add to that the fact that there are MILLIONS of those high capacity magazines out there, and that have been manufactured that aren't covered under any new law. Kind of like last time they were banned...they never disappeared from the market.


    "The point is that are rights are being taken away at an alarming rate." - I have to ask...what rights are being taken away at alarming rates? More directly...what rights have been taken away since Jan 1, 2012? There must be quite a few if it's an alarming rate.

    Ever hear of the Patriot Act? How about the fact that under the BS guise of terrorism you can be arrested and detained for an unspecified time with no due process of law? Pay attention and stop taking everything that the left says or for that matter what the right says and do some actual research. What rights since January 1? Why so narrow a parameter? More importantly I would ask why isn't there an outcry about the "Fast and Furious" program of the Obama administration to supply fully automatic assault rifles to Mexican drug cartels? You know the guns that were used to kill US Federal Agents?
    At least unlike your hero SC you are openly an anti-gun person.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Shooting is West Palm Beach leaves firefighter, gunman dead.
    By SouthFlaHopeful in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-04-2008, 05:54 AM
  2. At least 2 dead in Kansas City mall shooting
    By RspctFrmCalgary in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-30-2007, 11:06 AM
  3. India-At Least 100 children dead
    By NJFFSA16 in forum Fire Wire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-16-2004, 05:08 AM
  4. Children that cheered dead Americans
    By Waterboy620 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-12-2003, 05:01 PM
  5. Haysville, KS - 2 children dead
    By NJFFSA16 in forum Fire Wire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-22-2002, 03:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register