#BoycottNRA

#2,776
#2,776
Grand Vol said:
What about 4 rounds a second?

Too much?
Click to expand...

luthervol said:
Big jump from 999, so I like it. Still seems a little high. But as you may remember, I don't know much about it. How about we let some knowledgeable people from both sides sit down and reach a reasonable and rational compromise?
Click to expand...

Grand Vol said:
Okay, so four rounds per second too much?
Click to expand...

Grand Vol said:
He's not going to answer.
Click to expand...

See the bolded. Which was answered directly to you prior to your last two posts.
 
#2,777
#2,777
OuterBanksVol said:
The kids are right and the issue valid. Gun deaths in our country are disproportionately high. The need for more reasonable, rational gun laws exists to anyone not turning a blind eye.

Hunting and fishing are sports declining in popularity, sadly. Future generations will increasingly be isolated from gun use. A bend but don't break approach would be far wiser by the NRA rather than its confrontational style.

For those opposed to banning assault style rifles, large magazines and bump stocks, ask yourself why. If the answer has anything to do with your "rights" as opposed to common sense, you are denying reasonable, rational dialogue on gun control.

It is past time to ban weapons intended for warfare from public hands.
Click to expand...

I’ll ask you why ban them? How many lives per year would that save?
 
#2,780
#2,780
luthervol said:
That's so insanely stupid. You tell me, what's the problem with having representatives from both sides of the debate coming to a compromise on the legally allowed rounds per second that a gun can fire. That gets over the ridiculous hurdle you guys keep bringing up about defining an assault weapon. Magazine capacity would also be on the table.
Click to expand...

Let me explain something to you.

In firearms training there are certain unknowns that the average person must deal with.

1. We don’t know what the threat will look like.
2. We don’t know what it will take to survive the fight.
3. The fight will last as long as your ammunition does.

By limiting magazine capacity, you are also harming your average person.
 
#2,782
#2,782
OuterBanksVol said:
My mantra has been consistent and simple:

1. Ban assault style weapons
2. Ban high capacity magazines
3. Ban bump stocks

Yes, you can make the argument, "oh there's this weapon or that weapon which could be used just as deadly as an assault style weapon." Well that just doesn't hold any water since the majority of these recent mass murders are being effectuated by AR15 style weapons.

This weapon has no rightful place for civilian use.
Click to expand...

1) Gun grabbers refuse to acknowledge "assault style" weapons is meaningless. You have to further define what makes any particular gun fit, otherwise any and every semi-automatic rifle will be fair game for left wing crazies.

2) Wtf is "high capacity"? 9, 16, ??? Any?

3). Bump stocks destroy accuracy and waste ammo. They do approach the equivalent of full automatic (a machine gun) but a slower rate of fire.

The lion's share of AR's currently in circulation will NEVER be removed from the population. Banning news sales WILL NOT prevent a killer from getting one, or three.

The percentage of these used in muerders, suicides, accidental deaths is small.

This article written by a Huffington Post

Thousands Of Americans Are Gunned Down Each Year, But Few Die By Assault-Style Rifle | HuffPost

..."Those deaths account for about 2 percent of the 6,153 gun deaths and less than 1 percent of the 12,560 gun injuries the Gun Violence Archive has counted so far this year. This tally consists largely of homicides and assaults, but also includes suicides that were part of a murder-suicide. It also counts accidental deaths, the majority of which involve handguns, not rifles."...

Your ways will not stop anyone from killing. No one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,783
#2,783
lawgator1 said:
For a long time the NRA has had the advantage politically because 1) all they have to do is resist all change, 2) the gun control advocates are too scattered and lacked a particular agenda of exact changes that they wanted, and 3) the gun control advocates have lost steam over time.

That's all changing. Many NRA supporters are now willing to listen. Substantial regulation of AR15 style weapons is now the central theme. And the momentum this time may not fade.

A lot of GOPers and Dems in pro gun states are going to face some difficult questions this November.
Click to expand...

Bump for LG since he’s lurking. You already got this in FAWB1994 and it expired and was not renewed. Why is that?
 
#2,784
#2,784
luthervol said:
That's so insanely stupid. You tell me, what's the problem with having representatives from both sides of the debate coming to a compromise on the legally allowed rounds per second that a gun can fire. That gets over the ridiculous hurdle you guys keep bringing up about defining an assault weapon. Magazine capacity would also be on the table.
Click to expand...

With a revolver:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLk1v5bSFPw[/youtube]

So much for them mag limits...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,785
#2,785
82_VOL_83 said:
I truly believe that you fully understand how stupid this sounds yet just get a kick out of saying it.
Click to expand...

Not at all. It's almost as rational as my method of correctly and quickly constructing an equilateral triangle that you misunderstood.
 
#2,789
#2,789
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Let me explain something to you.

In firearms training there are certain unknowns that the average person must deal with.

1. We don’t know what the threat will look like.
2. We don’t know what it will take to survive the fight.
3. The fight will last as long as your ammunition does.

By limiting magazine capacity, you are also harming your average person.
Click to expand...

Average person? Nonsense.
 
#2,792
#2,792
luthervol said:
That's making the false assumption that all repubs. will remain in lockstep with the NRA. They aren't. that's going to be the biggest change. What do you think the repub. senators will do when they become convinced that a hard line pro gun stance actually hurts. their chance of being reelected?
Click to expand...

Here's a cool story bro. NRA called me soliciting the other night. Told them to leave me alone and hung up with them. I'm a lifetime member. The NRA has not one damn thing to do with my vote. What you people don't realize is the the NRA is simply a representation of a belief system. For every active member there are a hundred that give two ****'s about the NRA and think for themselves. They aren't in your camp and the politicians fear them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,793
#2,793
luthervol said:
Average person? Nonsense.
Click to expand...

Then just shut the hell up and admit you don’t know jack ****.

Tell you what Looter, I’ll pay for you to take a class at thunder ranch or gunsite. Travel is on you, I got your tuition fee though. This is your chance to actually learn something.
 
#2,798
#2,798
82_VOL_83 said:
You are more than welcome to leave and take LG and Luther under each arm. Guns gave you the right to be a liberal *****. Believe it or not, they help keep that right. Go to those other countries and try their damn freedom for awhile, who knows, you may like it.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight, when kids are murdered at school it's always "guns don't kill people, people kill people" but it's now the guns that gave us our freedom and not the people who fought. That some serious spin and extremely hypocritical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,799
#2,799
82_VOL_83 said:
Here's a cool story bro. NRA called me soliciting the other night. Told them to leave me alone and hung up with them. I'm a lifetime member. The NRA has not one damn thing to do with my vote. What you people don't realize is the the NRA is simply a representation of a belief system. For every active member there are a hundred that give two ****'s about the NRA and think for themselves. They aren't in your camp and the politicians fear them.
Click to expand...

I thought you said "cool" story. Politicians vote the way their constituents wish. As those wishes change, so do the politicians, and wishes, they are a-changing, bro.

Now that's a cool story.
 
#2,800
#2,800
luthervol said:
I thought you said "cool" story. Politicians vote the way their constituents wish. As those wishes change, so do the politicians, and wishes, they are a-changing, bro.

Now that's a cool story.
Click to expand...

Same story I heard back in 2012.

<yawn>
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top