Gun Laws

Posted 686 day(s) ago by Boognish70855 Views 3110 Replies
Results 51 to 100 of 3111
Page 2 of 63 1 2 3 4 12 52
  1. #51
    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    A pistol grip and collapsing stock make it easier to conceal, etc.
    Pistol grip does nothing to make it easier to conceal, and the majority of collapsible stocks shorten the gun by 4-5 inches total. If someone wants to conceal a gun, 4-5 inches isn't going to make a huge difference.

    Not to mention that this is a weak argument. How does easier to conceal = more dangerous? Should folding knives be outlawed because they're easier to conceal?

  2. #52
    SoonerLibertarian's Avatar
    Posts
    10,622
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma City

    We live in an aggressive society. We are taught throughout our lives that stealing from the rich to give to the poor is good and isn't really stealing just because the rich can afford it. We allow government to violate individual rights violently to go against things like drugs or whatever other things are taboo or not liked by certain groups. We allow government with no real vote most of the time now, to do whatever it wants with our military. We are basically taught at a young age to accept violence or aggression throughout society is a good thing and it starts right at the top and works it's way down. We expect government to be able to get rid of all this aggression through aggressive actions.
    The following users like this post: Sooner5030


  3. #53
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,392
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by ResidentEvil View Post
    Pistol grip does nothing to make it easier to conceal, and the majority of collapsible stocks shorten the gun by 4-5 inches total. If someone wants to conceal a gun, 4-5 inches isn't going to make a huge difference.

    Not to mention that this is a weak argument. How does easier to conceal = more dangerous? Should folding knives be outlawed because they're easier to conceal?
    I guess it depends on which cases you are talking about a pistol grip...a police model 870 that has a grip in place of a stock is easier to conceal.

    Nope, but it is already unlawful to conceal a gun (in most cases).

    I will agree that the idea of assault weapons is largely overinflated, however, the movement toward tactical weaponry is somewhat alarming.

  4. #54
    Originally Posted by ResidentEvil View Post
    I dont see the point in eating McDonalds. So lets regulate who can eat there.
    I dont see the point in drinking alcohol for fun. So lets make it illegal.

    I promise I'm not trying to harp on you. Just kind of making a point. I respect your opinion that you dont see the point in owning guns just for fun. Here are a lot of people who do see the point though. But it honestly doesn't matter what you or I individually think. Its a right granted to us through the US constitution.

    Unfortunately, things like the CT school shooting happen. Its one of the prices of freedom, its a terrible price and its unfortunate that some people choose to take advantage of the freedom we have. But its better than the alternative.

    I'm not opposed to gun regulation, but I think it must be thoughtful regulation. Lets spend a little less time worrying about whether a gun has a pistol grip, how long its barrel is or whether it has a supressor on it. Lets spend a little more time making sure that people are educated in their use before they buy them, that they aren't crazy, that people understand that guns aren't toys and are to be treated with respect.

    The biggest problem with gun regulation, is that it never really addresses the problem. What is the point of banning a rifle with a pistol grip? Does that make it more dangerous, or more likely to kill someone? I would be all for more firearms regulation, but I am certain that our elected officials are far too stupid to actually make regulations that would have a meaningful impact on gun related violence
    The difference between a cheeseburger and a gun is that if the wrong person gets a hold of a cheeseburger, they can't fat someone to death with it.
    I get what you're saying, and I agree that it is a right and a gun is a gun. The person is the one who kills someone, not the gun.
    I agree, there should be a real effort to advise anyone getting a gun that it is a HUGE responsibility.

  5. #55
    bushmaster06's Avatar
    Posts
    24,626
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    balls deep

    Originally Posted by soonerintn View Post
    The ACLU won't allow you to do psych testing on all individuals. Crazy people get their hands on cocaine, meth, etc all the time and they are illegal.

    Every time you get a gun, there is a background check. Not sure how you would implement a psych test that is reliable.
    Only FFL dealers are required to do background checks.

  6. #56
    Like anything else in life we have to have a balanced approach to gun. I am against being totally liberal or totally conservative when it comes to gun laws. I used to think Oklahoma had perfect gun laws until they came out with open carry, which is a silly law. If you can carry, what difference does it make if someone else can see your gun? The downside of this silly law is the fact that more and more businesses are placing "no-guns" signs because generally people hate to see guns in the open.
    The following users like this post: Boognish


  7. #57
    Shooter's Avatar
    Posts
    7,485
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Closer to the action than you are.

    Originally Posted by Aquinas View Post
    Like anything else in life we have to have a balanced approach to gun. I am against being totally liberal or totally conservative when it comes to gun laws. I used to think Oklahoma had perfect gun laws until they came out with open carry, which is a silly law. If you can carry, what difference does it make if someone else can see your gun? The downside of this silly law is the fact that more and more businesses are placing "no-guns" signs because generally people hate to see guns in the open.
    I've had my license since the very first ones were issued. Originally, the bill was written in a way that you could be penalized if your weapon came out of concealment. I really think that was the beginning of open carry. I honestly don't know why anyone would prefer to carry openly.
    The following users like this post: ImTheDude


  8. #58
    KCRuf/Nek's Avatar
    Posts
    39,720
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Prairie Village, Ks.

    Originally Posted by Shooterms View Post
    I've had my license since the very first ones were issued. Originally, the bill was written in a way that you could be penalized if your weapon came out of concealment. I really think that was the beginning of open carry. I honestly don't know why anyone would prefer to carry openly.
    They just passed it where I live and the expected percentage of folks wet themselves. They were predicting the Wild Wild West. In the couple of months since passage I haven't heard of one issue and I haven't seen one person carrying. I don't do so either. I like a little mystery in my carry.

  9. #59
    Sooner5030's Avatar
    Posts
    1,445
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Off the Grid

    The deadliest school massacre in US history didn't even involve hand guns or assault rifles.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

  10. #60
    Originally Posted by Sooner5030 View Post
    The deadliest school massacre in US history didn't even involve hand guns or assault rifles.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
    It also happened in 1927.

  11. #61
    Fahooglegods's Avatar
    Posts
    5,240
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Right near da beach. Boy-eee!

    Re: Gun Laws

    Well I am not giving up anything and there are hundreds of thousands that feel the same way. So best of luck with any type of gun control.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

  12. #62
    Originally Posted by Fahooglegods View Post
    Well I am not giving up anything and there are hundreds of thousands that feel the same way. So best of luck with any type of gun control.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
    Beware: bruthaman will be coming to your house first and he will be leading the way...he will level your house if need be.

  13. #63
    Fahooglegods's Avatar
    Posts
    5,240
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Right near da beach. Boy-eee!

    Re: Gun Laws

    Originally Posted by SoonerArtillery View Post
    Beware: bruthaman will be coming to your house first and he will be leading the way...he will level your house if need be.
    Oh I know, he has told me so. Should be interesting.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

  14. #64
    I support people have the right to protect themselves.I do believe there should be sensible tweaks to the system in acquiring guns and the type of guns that can be acquired on the free market.
    2 users like usaosooner's post: Boognish, IndySooner


  15. #65
    Fahooglegods's Avatar
    Posts
    5,240
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Right near da beach. Boy-eee!

    Re: Gun Laws

    Originally Posted by usaosooner View Post
    I support people have the right to protect themselves.I do believe there should be sensible tweaks to the system in acquiring guns and the type of guns that can be acquired on the free market.
    What types of guns? "AR's"? Handguns? Shotguns (Remington 870, 1100)? All are one shot per trigger pull.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

  16. #66
    .
    Last edited by soonerintn; July 20th, 2013 at 01:18 AM.

  17. #67
    Originally Posted by usaosooner View Post
    I support people have the right to protect themselves.I do believe there should be sensible tweaks to the system in acquiring guns and the type of guns that can be acquired on the free market.
    CT has some of the strictest gunlaws in the country. The shooter tried to buy a gun a few days before and was denied. That didn't stop him. He was determined to kill and all the gun laws in the world would not have stopped him. He did what all criminals will do when they want a gun and can't buy it legally, he stole them. How are more restrictive gun laws going to stop that?
    The following users like this post: JDShellnutt


  18. #68
    Originally Posted by kssooner View Post
    CT has some of the strictest gunlaws in the country. The shooter tried to buy a gun a few days before and was denied. That didn't stop him. He was determined to kill and all the gun laws in the world would not have stopped him. He did what all criminals will do when they want a gun and can't buy it legally, he stole them. How are more restrictive gun laws going to stop that?
    The notion is the less high powered weapons on the free market the less high power semi automatics weapons on the black market. The dude was going to kill regardless that is true.He would have had a tragedy regardless

  19. #69
    Originally Posted by usaosooner View Post
    The notion is the less high powered weapons on the free market the less high power semi automatics weapons on the black market. The dude was going to kill regardless that is true.He would have had a tragedy regardless
    And that notion is a false one. Ask mexico.

  20. #70
    Originally Posted by Fahooglegods View Post
    Well I am not giving up anything and there are hundreds of thousands that feel the same way. So best of luck with any type of gun control.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
    Me, me, me, me, me, me, me ...................

  21. #71
    .
    Last edited by soonerintn; July 20th, 2013 at 01:17 AM.

  22. #72
    The CT Med Examiner said all of the victims were shot by the 223. Each victim was shot multiple times, one was shot 11 times.

    I have said it before and I will say it again, there is absolutely zero need for any non military person to have a weapon like that. I have read that the magazine held 30 rounds. Thirty ****ing rounds? Are you kidding me? Why do you need that many rounds? Either you are shitty shot or you want to kill as many people as possible.

    This guys mother was a survivalist gun nut who had her guns for "protection."

    I cannot believe you ****ing gun nuts are still defending these hideous guns. These guns should not be available to general public and action needs to start now.

  23. #73
    Originally Posted by soonerintn View Post
    Not really. Most have just thought thru the long term consequences of an unarmed citizenry.

    No one is asking anyone to unarm tho... or atleast to the point of not being able to protect their house.

  24. #74
    Originally Posted by Fahooglegods View Post
    Well I am not giving up anything and there are hundreds of thousands that feel the same way. So best of luck with any type of gun control.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
    LOL yeah I would feel the same way if I had guns. It is a right, after all, granted by the USA. I just think that there should be more control over who gets guns, and perhaps stricter limitations and regulations for those that do. Not sure if it would change anything, as there will always be psychos and there will always be other ways of killing people in masses. Its a strange world we live in.

  25. #75
    Originally Posted by SG1 View Post
    The CT Med Examiner said all of the victims were shot by the 223. Each victim was shot multiple times, one was shot 11 times.

    I have said it before and I will say it again, there is absolutely zero need for any non military person to have a weapon like that. I have read that the magazine held 30 rounds. Thirty ****ing rounds? Are you kidding me? Why do you need that many rounds? Either you are shitty shot or you want to kill as many people as possible.

    This guys mother was a survivalist gun nut who had her guns for "protection."

    I cannot believe you ****ing gun nuts are still defending these hideous guns. These guns should not be available to general public and action needs to start now.
    The bad guys will still buy on the black market, steal them, etc. you want to ban a weapon because some sociopath used it to kill. I'll ask it again, if he had thrown 10 gallons of fuel, a propane tank in the school, chained all the exits doors and lit a match, would you be calling for the ban of all sales of gasoline, gas canisters, propane tanks and matches?

    The problem is not ****ing guns but going after them instead of the real problem is so much easier and it promotes political agendas.

  26. #76
    This problem is about guns. Guns will never be fully taken away, but IMO these ridiculous assault rifles and other excessive clip guns/pistols should be banned and forced to the black market, where there will eventually be less of them and the price will exorbitant.

    There is no good reason for any non military person to have a gun with an excessive clip count.
    2 users like SG1's post: Boognish, IndySooner


  27. #77
    Originally Posted by kssooner View Post
    The bad guys will still buy on the black market, steal them, etc. you want to ban a weapon because some sociopath used it to kill. I'll ask it again, if he had thrown 10 gallons of fuel, a propane tank in the school, chained all the exits doors and lit a match, would you be calling for the ban of all sales of gasoline, gas canisters, propane tanks and matches?

    The problem is not ****ing guns but going after them instead of the real problem is so much easier and it promotes political agendas.
    The problem with certain guns is that they serve no purpose other than to kill. Your comparison to gas, propane, matches doesn't hold up when you consider that those things are used for other purposes and needs. No one is arguing the right to bear arms to an extent, but weapons like an AR should in no way be available to the public.
    2 users like Boognish's post: BernieMadoff, IndySooner


  28. #78
    Originally Posted by kssooner View Post
    The problem is not ****ing guns but going after them instead of the real problem is so much easier and it promotes political agendas.
    If you look at the number of spree gun killings in the world.America leads the way in # of them. The reason being guns are readily available in the usa. Political agenda or not the # in comparison to other countries is astounding

    and again. I support people owning reasonable means of protection. I just want tweaks on the system

    I'm done with the topic I'll just be moving posts from now
    The following users like this post: Boognish


  29. #79
    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    The problem with certain guns is that they serve no purpose other than to kill. Your comparison to gas, propane, matches doesn't hold up when you consider that those things are used for other purposes and needs. No one is arguing the right to bear arms to an extent, but weapons like an AR should in no way be available to the public.
    They are uses for other needs. Competitive shooting, hunting, home defense, target shooting. 99.9% of legal gun owners who own an AR will never use it to kill any human being.
    The following users like this post: Sooner Bob


  30. #80
    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    The problem with certain guns is that they serve no purpose other than to kill. Your comparison to gas, propane, matches doesn't hold up when you consider that those things are used for other purposes and needs. No one is arguing the right to bear arms to an extent, but weapons like an AR should in no way be available to the public.
    Would the situation in the school have been better had he gone in w/a shotgun loaded w/00 buck?

  31. #81
    Those lamenting the sizes of magazines for firearms--please consider this:


  32. #82
    Additionally, you're trying to blame the tool used, when the problem isn't the tool--it's what led to the action. How do we fix the problems that lead to him going to the school in the first place? That's the question we should be asking--not how do we minimize the mayhem and death visited after the shooting starts.

  33. #83
    Originally Posted by kssooner View Post
    They are uses for other needs. Competitive shooting, hunting, home defense, target shooting. 99.9% of legal gun owners who own an AR will never use it to kill any human being.
    Ok well let's just agree to disagree on this one... automatic rifles were manufactured for military use. If you were arguing about a hunting rifle, or any other gun, I would agree. I don't think anyone would want to hunt with an AR unless they didn't mind spraying bullets all through their kill. And as stated numerous times, an AR should not be necessary for home defense.

  34. #84
    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Ok well let's just agree to disagree on this one... automatic rifles were manufactured for military use. If you were arguing about a hunting rifle, or any other gun, I would agree. I don't think anyone would want to hunt with an AR unless they didn't mind spraying bullets all through their kill. And as stated numerous times, an AR should not be necessary for home defense.
    You don't understand what an AR is. It's not an automatic weapon. It fires the same as most other rifles--every time you pull the trigger, it fires once. If you hold the trigger down, nothing happens after the first round is fired.
    2 users like oucub23's post: Sooner Bob, sooner68


  35. #85
    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    Would the situation in the school have been better had he gone in w/a shotgun loaded w/00 buck?
    Well if you consider that he would have had time between each round fired, perhaps someone could have tackled him from behind or something. With a machine gun, one can spray bullets all around him and keep others at a distance. So yes, I'd say it could have been better with a shotgun.

  36. #86
    Dexa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,261
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Seoul, South Korea

    Gun Laws

    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Ok well let's just agree to disagree on this one... automatic rifles were manufactured for military use. If you were arguing about a hunting rifle, or any other gun, I would agree. I don't think anyone would want to hunt with an AR unless they didn't mind spraying bullets all through their kill. And as stated numerous times, an AR should not be necessary for home defense.

  37. #87
    KCRuf/Nek's Avatar
    Posts
    39,720
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Prairie Village, Ks.

    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Ok well let's just agree to disagree on this one... automatic rifles were manufactured for military use. If you were arguing about a hunting rifle, or any other gun, I would agree. I don't think anyone would want to hunt with an AR unless they didn't mind spraying bullets all through their kill. And as stated numerous times, an AR should not be necessary for home defense.
    Anything that keeps myself and my family safe and alive is necessary for home defense. My weapon i use use for home defense doesn't leave my home. My handgun does.

  38. #88
    Originally Posted by kssooner View Post
    They are uses for other needs. Competitive shooting, hunting, home defense, target shooting. 99.9% of legal gun owners who own an AR will never use it to kill any human being.
    20 kids were gunned down and you come back with this shit? None of those are a good reason.

  39. #89
    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Well if you consider that he would have had time between each round fired, perhaps someone could have tackled him from behind or something. With a machine gun, one can spray bullets all around him and keep others at a distance. So yes, I'd say it could have been better with a shotgun.
    You don't understand what he was using. A non-pump action shotgun fires at the same rate as an AR-15. You have more rounds with an AR, but a buckshot loaded shotgun does far more damage with each round fired.

  40. #90
    KCRuf/Nek's Avatar
    Posts
    39,720
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Prairie Village, Ks.

    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Well if you consider that he would have had time between each round fired, perhaps someone could have tackled him from behind or something. With a machine gun, one can spray bullets all around him and keep others at a distance. So yes, I'd say it could have been better with a shotgun.
    I don't believe there's any proof he used anything but the handguns. And the rifle he had wasn't a fully automatic military weapon.

  41. #91
    Dexa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,261
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Seoul, South Korea

    Gun Laws

    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Well if you consider that he would have had time between each round fired, perhaps someone could have tackled him from behind or something. With a machine gun, one can spray bullets all around him and keep others at a distance. So yes, I'd say it could have been better with a shotgun.
    What if I told you that you cannot just go buy an automatic weapon? Would that change anything you're saying?

  42. #92
    Originally Posted by KCRuf/Nek View Post
    And the rifle he had wasn't a fully automatic military weapon.
    This is what people don't understand.

  43. #93
    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    You don't understand what an AR is. It's not an automatic weapon. It fires the same as most other rifles--every time you pull the trigger, it fires once. If you hold the trigger down, nothing happens after the first round is fired.
    Okay. So you pull the trigger what, 5x per second? It was developed for use by military and has a large magazine that is unnecessary. Those are things I would say should be controlled and kept from the public as much as possible.

  44. #94
    Dexa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,261
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Seoul, South Korea

    Gun Laws

    Originally Posted by SG1 View Post
    20 kids were gunned down and you come back with this shit? None of those are a good reason.
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

    We should probably ban fertilizer and Ryder trucks.
    2 users like Dexa's post: Lake_Bum, MudcrkSooner


  45. #95
    Shooter's Avatar
    Posts
    7,485
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Closer to the action than you are.

    The kind of gun doesn't matter. He could have done far more damage with a couple cans of gasoline and a Zippo...or a '72 Buick.

  46. #96
    Fahooglegods's Avatar
    Posts
    5,240
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Right near da beach. Boy-eee!

    Re: Gun Laws

    Originally Posted by SG1 View Post
    The CT Med Examiner said all of the victims were shot by the 223. Each victim was shot multiple times, one was shot 11 times.

    I have said it before and I will say it again, there is absolutely zero need for any non military person to have a weapon like that. I have read that the magazine held 30 rounds. Thirty ****ing rounds? Are you kidding me? Why do you need that many rounds? Either you are shitty shot or you want to kill as many people as possible.

    This guys mother was a survivalist gun nut who had her guns for "protection."

    I cannot believe you ****ing gun nuts are still defending these hideous guns. These guns should not be available to general public and action needs to start now.
    Blah blah blah. You have zero understanding of the entire purpose of the second amendment. As I said before good luck getting hundreds of thousands of individuals to bow to a liberal gun grabbing agenda.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

  47. #97
    Shooter's Avatar
    Posts
    7,485
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Closer to the action than you are.

    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Okay. So you pull the trigger what, 5x per second? It was developed for use by military and has a large magazine that is unnecessary. Those are things I would say should be controlled and kept from the public as much as possible.

    The only people you can "keep them from" are the people who don't go on killing sprees.

  48. #98
    Fahooglegods's Avatar
    Posts
    5,240
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Right near da beach. Boy-eee!

    Re: Gun Laws

    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Well if you consider that he would have had time between each round fired, perhaps someone could have tackled him from behind or something. With a machine gun, one can spray bullets all around him and keep others at a distance. So yes, I'd say it could have been better with a shotgun.
    For ****s sakes. What machine gun? Dude please educate yourself on firearms before spewing such nonsense. He an AR15 and that is NOT a machine gun. There is time between each round fired.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

  49. #99
    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Okay. So you pull the trigger what, 5x per second? It was developed for use by military and has a large magazine that is unnecessary. Those are things I would say should be controlled and kept from the public as much as possible.
    You pull the trigger at the same rate you do with a pistol. Or a semi-automatic shotgun. Or a semi-auto hunting rifle.

    This is a semi-auto hunting rifle.


    This is an AR-15. They both fire at the same rate.


    They both fire the same ammunition. One looks scarier than the other though.

  50. #100
    Dexa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,261
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Seoul, South Korea

    Gun Laws

    Originally Posted by Boognish View Post
    Okay. So you pull the trigger what, 5x per second? It was developed for use by military and has a large magazine that is unnecessary. Those are things I would say should be controlled and kept from the public as much as possible.
    Should probably regulate and control jeeps too.

    You completely ignore anything anyone is telling you if it doesn't jive with your already imprinted opinion.

    People are telling you the "assault" part of the weapon is not what made it any more deadly than any other hunting rifles. ****.. Most HUNTING rifles are MORE deadly. Dude might not have put multiple rounds in someone if he was using 30-06 or 308

    You're letting your already established opinion stonewall any attempt of rational discussion.

    "Black gun = scary and bad"

    That's all I'm hearing.

Similar Threads

  1. No need for Voter ID laws?
    By kssooner in forum ThunderDome
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: October 25th, 2012, 07:44 AM
  2. Laws to abolish
    By Coach in forum ThunderDome
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: August 15th, 2012, 06:51 PM

Tags for this Thread