I really hope he doesn't end up having a political motivation or a tie to any radical groups. The current political climate would make others guilty by association and I don't think it will end well. There's already too much internal hatred.
Vegas shooting
- Thread starter KnighttimeJoe
- Start date
just so we are clear, you dont think a jew from 1930s germany would be happy to own 40 guns? i mean is possible he could have then handed them out to his family and friends if an occasion would arise like say his possible extermination.
please dont say that couldnt happen here, because fdr threw a bunch of japanese in internment camps.
To be honest, I don't think you could even compare the 1930's with today. It's apples and oranges. In reality, a mans 40 guns wouldn't stand up to anything the US government could throw at them.
why cant you answer a very simple question?
trying to remember how vietnam or afghanistan or even syria are working out for the us government...
Really? Our military has been trying to defeat a bunch of uneducated zealots with AK47's for 16 years.
Putting aside actual restrictions on gun-ownership, tracking of sales, etc. I think it is more than OK to look at restricting/banning bump stocks. If we are banning fully-auto weapons (which we are), then it's wrong to allow sales of these devices which are simply ways to circumvent the law.
Yep. CQC and urban pacification is one of those nasty details that people don't consider. Smart weapons help little with those issues.
We are not banning full auto, and bump stocks are not the same as full auto.
Please educate yourself before posting.
I’m a gun owner and second amendment defender but I have zero problem with this . I’ll get ripped to shreds for saying that but I wouldn’t mind it at all
The problem is the same problem with abortion restrictions ... once one law is implemented, it is extended to outlaw any firearm, just like abortions.
I mean, I have no need for a bump stock. I'm also, all for restricting them to people who literally have a medical need for them, just like a handicap hang tag. But soon we're going to be back to the, 'It's capable of automatic fire' argument.
I mean ... weren't we just talking about the 'weapon of war' argument for all semi-automatics just a few months ago? And pushing for revolver and bolt-action only weapons?
Which is why the 'spirit of the law' argument from the anti-Amendment crowd is hypocrisy in action. They will use the same argument to say 'military-style weapons' in general, associating them with general issue, selective fire weapons of militaries.
The alleged 'loopholes' go both ways. See the state of New York for a perfect example.
I don't have a problem with this, my only issue is that it would start a slippery slope of banning parts and when would it end.
I mean occasionally you have to give up something and compromise but know when to stand your ground on the issue . And if we could get both sides of congress to stop putting bullshit in our laws to try and be sneaky we would be much better off
I don't trust a single person in DC to hold up their end though. That's where my hesitance is. They all only care about the next election. They're all scumbags and would destroy every amendment if it meant they could keep their "jobs", cush lifestyle and uber benefits.
Ultimatelyl, this is why "common sense" stuff doesn't pass. You have people on the right that wouldn't vote for it because of NRA types and people on the left that wouldn't vote for it because it doesn't go far enough (or they would add 100 things to it which they know would kill it).
It takes a strong leader at the top to push it through .... Neither Obama nor Trump have any clue about leadership.
Can you ever provide a sound argument or are you just full of quips?
The Patriot Act is a slippery slope. Vietnam was a slippery slope. Afghanistan has been a slippery slope. Pulling out of Iraq was a slippery slope. Iran deal was a slippery slope. Any deal with DPRK for the last 30 years has been a slippery slope. If something needs to happen then make it happen. There's no reason to drag it out over decades and/or tie it to a bunch of other political bullshit.
W and Obama didn't, they were politicians since day one. Trump is a leader and not a politician, he built a billion dollar company, that doesn't happen by luck. He's already been dealing with Chucky and Nancy to get stuff done because of all the self righteous anti Trumpers. He wants to get shit done no matter the political outfall. Trump may just have enough brains/cockiness/stupidity/political naivety to finally get the cesspool that is DC to work for the US again instead of themselves and if he doesn't then we'll just have another worthless puppet PC Clinton/Bush/Obama clone the next election.
Holy shit this post would be hilarious if it wasn't so goddamn depressing.
What happened to Coke? I'm starting to sound like the crazy one.
Bob, you get dumber by the day. This post would be hilarious if you didnt actually believe it.
Not just executive orders- the best, beautiful executive orders.
That was only on his tv show. As president, they have been quitting once they realized they were working for a halfwit.
Never said he's gotten a lot done, I think he's going to though. He's fighting both sides of the aisle. He did get funding for Harvey and the debt ceiling fight pushed off by working with Chuck and Nancy though because McConnell is worthless.
It's sort of funny to hear the hysteric Trump haters on this issue. On one hand, they assure everyone that Trump is a mini-dictator who is going to destroy the rule of law in the country, impose his will on every issue, and usher in a new era of every bad thing you can imagine. Then, in the very next breath, they'll laugh it up about how "Trump can't get anything done!" and that he's useless. It's just hilarious hypocrisy and irony.
He's an unstoppable dictator one minute, and then a helpless puppet who can't get anything done the next.
Utterly agree.
Trump is no better and no worse, than Obama on Execute Orders, although W. was better than both (although he had his own party in Congress for 6 years). Trump's just not as "politically correct" as Obama in his orders, although Obama did start many of the immigration issues (sorry, but that's just truth).
However, unlike Obama ... or W. for that matter, Trump doesn't just blindly side with his party. Trump is willing to call them out if things, which is why Democrats in Congress side with him at times.
So yes, it's funny, and sad, to see the rampant partisanship and hypocrisy from the left. They should be happy the silent majority of Republicans picked Trump, instead of the establishment getting what they wanted. Had the latter happened, a lot more would have been done, and not to the left's liking.
They also have themselves to blame by picking Clinton.
As long as they are out of there, I'm good. Washington DC is a cesspool.
I'm not a fan of Trump, but I would vote for him 100 times out of 100 if his opponent was Hillary Clinton.
Unfortunately for Trump, you actually DO need some friends in Washington. If you are constantly fighting the other party and your own party, nothing will ever get done. Some people (usually me) think that Washington getting nothing done is actually good for the country.
Although it's not the most ideal, I too agree, this is the best scenario, given the possible outcomes of 2016.
Under the NFA, it is illegal for any private civilian to own any fully automatic weapons manufactured after May 19, 1986. Only certain types of FFL/SOTs may make them, and then only for purchase by qualified state and federal agencies. There are no exceptions. According to the ATF’s official handbook on NFA laws and regulations, it’s not even legal to make new replacement parts for pre-1986 machine guns: “There is no exception allowing for the lawful production, transfer, possession, or use of a post-May 18, 1986 machinegun receiver as a replacement receiver on a weapon produced prior to May 19, 1986.”
So, yeah, it's not legal. And as for the argument that bump stocks aren't fully auto: I know you're trying to get me on a technicality, but effectively it's fully auto, as demonstrated here.
are they incredibly accurate? No. Is there a point to them other than it being "badass"? no. Vegas shooter didn't need to be accurate as he was spraying hundreds of rounds a minute into a crowd of 22,000 people.
So, yeah, it's not legal. And as for the argument that bump stocks aren't fully auto: I know you're trying to get me on a technicality, but effectively it's fully auto, as demonstrated here.
are they incredibly accurate? No. Is there a point to them other than it being "badass"? no. Vegas shooter didn't need to be accurate as he was spraying hundreds of rounds a minute into a crowd of 22,000 people.
i think they are somewhat stupid and wouldnt want to buy one. I dont necessarily think they should be legal as they were created to skirt the law. that said, i dont know i would support a law to make them illegal. that would require the Rs to compromise on the issue. i dont know if the Ds would be willing to compromise on another issue important to Rs in return.
I'd have to go back and look, but I heard yesterday somewhere that some Rs were looking into this very issue.
I have fired a rifle with a bump stock and can confirm that it's utterly hopeless trying to hit anything with it. You're using a rifle that was designed in single shot mode and suddenly throwing it into a near full auto mode; the bolt motion is jerky and shitty. I've shot plenty of full auto rifles from various countries and they're all much, much smoother. That said, there's a reason most enlisted soldiers get an M16 or M4 with a 3-round burst mode. They can't hit shit in full auto.
I think this monster in Vegas knew he didn't really have to aim. Just get as many rounds into the mass of people below and he'd hit enough to create a panic. I don't know if we'll ever know for sure, but I would wager that MANY of the dead were crushed/trampled to death rather than dying of gunshot wounds. I was in Europe a few years ago when like 60 people died in a concert venue from being crushed to death. A single gunman shot and killed a guy in the back, panic ensued, and people were crushed under the weight of people fleeing.
I think this monster in Vegas knew he didn't really have to aim. Just get as many rounds into the mass of people below and he'd hit enough to create a panic. I don't know if we'll ever know for sure, but I would wager that MANY of the dead were crushed/trampled to death rather than dying of gunshot wounds. I was in Europe a few years ago when like 60 people died in a concert venue from being crushed to death. A single gunman shot and killed a guy in the back, panic ensued, and people were crushed under the weight of people fleeing.
Yeah, it's garbage but effective from that range, into that large of a crowd. Seems like he initially targeted the front, near the stage. Some injuries/deaths could be attributed to trampling, but it seems like from what I've heard most were gunshots. Really ****ing awful. I saw a video from someone at the front of the stage and you can see people dying, going white, etc. Stuff of nightmares man.
Wrong. Not illegal, how are you still confused on this.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Machine-Guns/BI.aspx
5 second Google search.
As for bumpfire stocks, all they do is make it slightly easier to bump fire (which is basically using the recoil of the rifle to simulate full auto). I can bumpfire some of my guns without a bunch.pfire stock, takes a little practice but not that hard. Are you going to ban my knowledge of this along with banning these modified stocks? Are you going to ban YouTube training videos on how to modify a regular stock so it's a little easier to bumpfire? Are you going to just ban YouTube? Or just ban information in general?
