Another mass shooting......

[heyslick]

The Fort Hood shooter & the powers that be were afraid to truly investigate the actions of this lunatic & you know damn well Y.

there were constant stories on the Fort Hood shooting, and they investigated the radical Muslims that he had contact with AND KILLED THE PRIMARY ONE WITH A DRONE STRIKE. what didn't get investigated?

Uh am I the only one that notices the relatively low amount of media coverage on this story?

seems like it depends on the source: some seem to have a daily story or two, others almost nothing. not as dramatic as BATMAN SHOOTING, i guess.

Maybe I didn't make myself clear - NO they didn't investigate/i.e.,the Major because many of his fellow officers were afraid to say anything about him - again as I mentioned previously fear of profiling a Muslim - dead fellow soldiers were the victims - now that was my point. Fucking sic society that allows this to happen,maybe a catch 22 situation would seem more appropriate?

 

[janklow]

Assault weapons = ak's , hk's, 223's, I could go on but I hope u get the message. They got some space age shit out here. Like on that movie, "wanted". Shit that shoots around corners and shit.

so you've named:

-a generic model of firearm, various versions of which have and have not been called been called "assault weapons";

-a MANUFACTURER of firearms that makes a wide variety of models, the majority of which have not been called "assault weapons;

-a random CALIBER of firearm, prominently featured in firearms not identified as assault weapons.

i will assume this means you cannot define "assault weapon?" you should go on if you want the message to be "i have some idea of what i am talking about." talking about guns from Wanted is not the best start.

 

[janklow]

Maybe I didn't make myself clear - NO they didn't investigate/i.e.,the Major because many of his fellow officers were afraid to say anything about him - again as I mentioned previously fear of profiling a Muslim - dead fellow soldiers were the victims - now that was my point. Fucking sic society that allows this to happen,maybe a catch 22 situation would seem more appropriate?

i don't think you understand what "investigate" means. you were talking about how the story disappears, which is all well and good except that it's not true, but NOW you're talking about Hasan not having been investigated prior to the shooting. so we're moving to that as the topic?

 

[plocc]

Weapons designed to shoot rapidly at human targets at close range, semi-automatic rifles with detachable clips or magazines, also guns with flash supressors, foldable or telescopic stocks, infrared sight beams.

In other words shit that bangers use to clear da block. I hope that clears it up for you.

 

[plocc]

I by no means claim to be a gun expert. I just know how cats I used to roll with get down and what i've seen with MY EYES.

 

[janklow]

Weapons designed to shoot rapidly at human targets at close range, semi-automatic rifles with detachable clips or magazines, also guns with flash supressors, foldable or telescopic stocks, infrared sight beams.

In other words shit that bangers use to clear da block. I hope that clears it up for you.

"weapons designed to shoot rapidly at human targets at close range" either isn't accurate at all (tell me how many of the 19 weapons referred to in the 1994 AWB were meant for "close range") or can be applied to pretty much ANY gun if you want to.

and plenty of firearms with detachable magazines (not sure exactly what a non-detachable clip would be), flash suppressors and/or folding/telescopic stocks never met the "assault weapon standard" either. infrared sight beams? these things aren't even part of the firearms you're talking about, so that's meaningless.

nope, still not clear. but this might actually be the point.

I by no means claim to be a gun expert. I just know how cats I used to roll with get down and what i've seen with MY EYES.

don't know what this is supposed to mean, but having seen a couple of guns doesn't mean they were "assault weapons."

 

[plocc]

I see you wanna debate about this shit. Let me just simplify. You obviously know more about guns than me. Okay. You know the difference between a gun that you hunt game with (shotgun or a 30 odd 6 ),and or a Ak 47 with a banana clip or a drum. The difference between a handgun to protect your home with ,( 44 magnum revolver), or 40 cal gloc with the extended 30 shot clip. ones for civilians, one for military or law enforcement. Its that simple.

 

[janklow]

@plocc: i want to debate about it because the fact that people can't define what the assault weapons they freak out about are is an issue. getting past the erroneous definitions and problems with cosmetic differences might let people approach the issue more rationally.

it's easy to note a difference between a bolt-action .30-06 that someone hunts with and an AK clone with a large magazine. however, i can hunt with plenty of rifles that look "military-style" and have all the OMG evil features, and yet are chambered for solid rounds for hunting.

as for defending my home, i'd rather take the semi-automatic with the extended magazine than the .44 Magnum (although not with that exact magazine in this state), and i ABSOLUTELY don't think the former is only for the military or law enforcement. and i guess it goes without saying there's nothing about the former that was affected by the AWB other than the magazine size.

 

[plocc]

So basically your saying a gun is a gun regardless of the features or how many times it shoots. If so why is the military outfitted only with semi automatic or fully automatic fire power? And what would be the reason for a regular guy/non thug or gangster to have anything that can shoot 30+ times. other than to show off or brag. I doubt that their gonna have that much drama that they need that much firepower or are you o. Some militia shit waiting for the race war?

 

[plocc]

If you aint banging or sitting on some birds and got multi-stacks in the crib there is no need to have a bunch of heavy artillery.

 

[janklow]

@plocc: i'm saying guns should be described accurately. to start with, semi-automatic weapons are not anything special or extra-powerful, and they're not in any way restricted to the military. what exactly is so impressive about a semi-automatic weapon? is the M9 that much more deadly of a handgun or a round than some civilian's 92FS because a soldier carries it?

as for fully-automatic weapons, they're heavily regulated, but there's also the fact that for civilian shooting, they're not the cheapest things in the world. when the government is paying for it, it's less of an issue. it's the same reason they can afford to purchase a variety of things i can't.

 

[janklow]

reason for a regular guy to have a firearm that shoots 30+ times? any of the reasons we've discussed (self-defense, competitive shooting, recreational shooting, all the stuff the Second Amendment is based on, blah, blah, blah)? if you think a 30-round magazine is only for the military, criminals or braggarts, you're already approaching the concept from a ridiculous perspective. but on the other hand, if i'm a law-abiding citizen, why does it matter if i have a 30-round magazine for my firearm?

plus, please don't tell me that it's logical for criminals to have a gun or a magazine that i don't have, especially if you're arguing for laws prohibiting them, because that's just some backwards nonsense. a criminal needs "heavy artillery" (i have no idea what that means, given what you've said to date) but a civilian does not? this makes absolutely no sense.

 

[plocc]

Like I said player, so you saying a gun is gun. So say somebody gets pulled over by the cops riding with an unloaded shotty in a car, and somebody gets caught with an unloaded ak 47. Whos going to jail. since you seem to be knowledged about guns give me a discription .

 

[janklow]

like i said, if you want to talk about gun laws, you should talk about the guns accurately.

a car with an unloaded shotgun versus an unloaded ak-47? where is this taking place (city, state), who's driving and/or in the car, is there ammunition in the car, is there anything about either weapon not stated in those brief descriptions that would effect the legality, etc, etc ... this is not really a straightforward question.

 

[plocc]

You sound like you might be an attorney on staff for the nra. I admit im not as versed as you are as far as the technical aspects of what constitutes the categoration of different types of firearms. It might be a bit utopian, but if there were a gun law to prevent these wackos and hate mongers from legally purchashing firearms i'd support it 100%. There are societies that work or exist where everybody isnt strapped, (England).

 

[kingblaze84]

If you aint banging or sitting on some birds and got multi-stacks in the crib there is no need to have a bunch of heavy artillery.

What about to defend oneself from government tyranny? A govt that fears the people is a good thing in that it won't abuse our rights too much, as what happens in many parts of the world. I support our current gun laws but I do believe there should be a limit in how much ammo and guns a person can buy per year. Mind you, if a nation ever dares to invade America, wouldn't you want some neighbors strapped to the teeth? A nation that has citizens unarmed is easily bullied around by its govt, and God knows a lot of that is happening now. Imagine how govt would act if we were all unarmed.

 

[plocc]

Im familiar with that angle too, but believe me if it ever comes to that there is no gun you can buy thats gonna be able to protect you. Like outkast said on their Atliens album , "They got some shit that shoot through walls from where they stay at". Like them drones.

 

[janklow]

It might be a bit utopian, but if there were a gun law to prevent these wackos and hate mongers from legally purchashing firearms i'd support it 100%.

just remember that there are already a lot of laws that prohibit crazy people and/or criminals from legally purchasing firearms. plus, a hatemonger might be a fucking scumbag, but he'll still have rights.

 

[janklow]

What about to defend oneself from government tyranny? A govt that fears the people is a good thing in that it won't abuse our rights too much, as what happens in many parts of the world. I support our current gun laws but I do believe there should be a limit in how much ammo and guns a person can buy per year.

what does the bolded even mean? as far as ammunition goes, a lot of the current drama about buying lots of ammo is stirred up by people that don't shoot. thousands of rounds SOUNDS like a lot... until you're actually considering the economics of it, or actually shooting regularly. as for the guns, that's part of the current F&F issue: you HAD dealers saying "these purchasers are suspicious" (as opposed to regular buyers) getting told "fuck it, let the sales go through." but every damn agency wants to look big and have more authority, so...

 

[plocc]

It just dont stop.