Marine goes in on CA senator over her proposed ban on assault weapons

[zombie]

instead of talking shit... folk should be posting stats.

stats that say yes, this many mass killing happened with AR's.

stats that say most gun violence is done with AR's.

but yall aint gon do that are you?

yall just gon keep repeating what ever charlie sheen and beyonce tell you to repeat.

fucking sheep.

yall acting like 9/11 all over again... we get attacked by saudi's and jews but go after saddam.

why are we going after AR's again?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

From 1982 to 2012 close to 62 mass/spree killings have taken place in america

68 semi-automatic weapons, 35 assault rifles, 20 Handguns and 19 rifles.

Now will you dummies stop and look what is happening or will you continue to stick your head in the sand and act like owning weapons of mass murder still have a place in a civilized society.

I guess @janklow missed this post....

Exactly....

62 Mass/Spree killings in America since 1982

68 semi-automatics, 35 assault rifles, 20 by handguns and 19 by rifles. 49 of them were obtained legally

I wish you niggas would just be straight up about guns....you guys think they are cool. I get that, shit I think guns are cool, the bigger the badder, the more bullets the fire and the more shit they can blow up the cooler it is. But reality has to step in when 13,000 people a year are being murdered by guns, gun murders per 100,000 in america are higher by a HUGE margin over any other first world and some 2nd world countries. To keep going along with the status quo is INSANITY.

Fuck the other first world nations. America is america and Americans want their motherfucking guns we don't need to conform to fucking western europe.

Its not about conforming to western europe.....its about stopping the guns violence and gun deaths....it's not that hard to understand...

I think that is exactly what it is, certain people have a mindset that says america should conform to western european standards. But america has it's own history and is developing it's own culture part of that culture is a deep distrust of government and like it or not that is one reason the gun must stay. gun violence is not going to stop, that's just a risk the public must take if we want our freedom. most gun death does not come by machine gun so what reason does the government have for trying to take the AR'S away.

 

[aneed123]

I thought full auto and hollow points are illegal anyway? most assault rifles folk buy from stores are semi.... everyone should have access to them because criminals aint gonna put them down nor will law enforcement .. law abiding citizens are gonna be the only one this law affects....

 

[blakfyahking]

instead of talking shit... folk should be posting stats.

stats that say yes, this many mass killing happened with AR's.

stats that say most gun violence is done with AR's.

but yall aint gon do that are you?

yall just gon keep repeating what ever charlie sheen and beyonce tell you to repeat.

fucking sheep.

yall acting like 9/11 all over again... we get attacked by saudi's and jews but go after saddam.

why are we going after AR's again?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

From 1982 to 2012 close to 62 mass/spree killings have taken place in america

68 semi-automatic weapons, 35 assault rifles, 20 Handguns and 19 rifles.

Now will you dummies stop and look what is happening or will you continue to stick your head in the sand and act like owning weapons of mass murder still have a place in a civilized society.

I guess @janklow missed this post....

68 semi-automatics, 35 assault rifles, 20 by handguns and 19 by rifles. 49 of them were obtained legally

your argument is invalid until you can explain the difference between "semi-automatics" and "assault rifles"

LOL @ trying to specify between the two as if they are not the exact same thing

 

[DarcSkies]

AH YES...

Join the Marine Corps, swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the Laws of the Land and Obey the Orders of those appointed over you...

Then proceed to tell one of the longest tenured and one of the most powerful Senators in the House What the fuck you NOT gone do...

Politics is defiantly not Marine proof.

 

The user and all related content has been deleted.

 

[janklow]

he's like "well whyyy do you need it?"

and we are just like "cause i like fucking with shit. you see all them damn rails?"

not to mention the fact that i am not sure why i should have to explain to people why i want to buy something there's no reason i shouldn't be able to buy...

I guess @janklow missed this post....

go ahead and tell me what i missed about it, since it definitely doesn't relate to my response to you... wait, was it the stat thing? well, let's see, Black_Samson's post said "stats that say yes, this many mass killing happened with AR's. stats that say most gun violence is done with AR's." the latter is straight-up false, and certainly not supported by that post. the former is not clear. here's an example: that data set says the 1991 Royal Oak postal shooting was committed with an "assault weapon." it was, in fact, committed with a Ruger 10/22, which was not an assault weapon under the old ban and typically, what with it being a .22LR plinker and all, not really considered an "assault weapon" by anyone. it's certainly not "military grade." i have questions about other examples as well (Columbine, that one shooting involving a police officer possibly using an issued weapon) , but the thing is, if you're trying to tell me how these "assault weapons" are so prevalent in mass shootings, and the post doesn't say that and includes data you're counting as "assault weapons" that shouldn't be... well...

@Black_Samson... Speaking of facts, why does everyone equate gun control with the government taking away every gun in every American household?

take a look at Feinstein's legislation and history, as well as some of the anti-gun politicians who have literally confiscation of firearms

 

[janklow]

1) I love how you completely ignored all the stats a I put up. In Sandy Hook, the VERY FIRST person that got killed was the LEGAL OWNER OF THE GUN. Secondly the vast majority of mass murders are done by legal guns. 35 assault rifles were used to commit mass murders in the US versus 19 rifles.

you can check my previous post for why i take issue with the "35 assault rifles" part. some of them were not rifles, some of them were not assault weapons. check out the source for the data.

2) Your absolutley right I dont think a person who has had a background check and a psychological evaluation should own a gun. AGAIN the VAST MAJORITY OF MASS MURDERS ARE DONE BY LEGALLY PURCHASED GUNS.

you might want to re-read this part, because you're currently saying having a background check and a psych eval should mean no guns. but here's the thing: when you talk about background checks, that's already in effect, and psych evals? how would you enforce that?

3) Are you seriously trying to tell me a person who wants to own a weapon of mass murder shouldnt be registered?

i'm saying they're not "weapons of mass murder," and calling them that means you're both unqualified to talk about weapons and probably too emotional to make a serious argument on the topic.

1) Way to ignore the salient point....but I see that thats the theme of all your responses.

please don't start this petting bitching since you're not responding to my points, but merely complaining that i am not responding to yours. much of your posting is "i have a hatred for guns and i am going to be emotional about them as a response," and i am not sure what more you want me to say about that.

2) Again side stepping the actual point....and focusing on minutia.

you didn't pick up on the fact that i don't see a problem with Wal-Mart selling them legally or with high-capacity magazines being sold? because you didn't make a point beyond saying you object, and i do not agree.

3) You need to explain it because you want to own something that has the express purpose of killing lots of people quickly.

no, they don't have that "express purpose," since that's not what mine are used for. and it's not even why they were developed in the first place (rifles, even in the military, are not designed for "killing lots of people quickly").

But reality has to step in when 13,000 people a year are being murdered by guns-

by "assault weapons?" no. and i've said it before: my reality is that we should address what's causing the majority of those murders: the drug trade.

Everybody else isnt dumb, there is a reason the military use assault rifles such as M-16s, AR-15s, AK-47s etc....and its not because the "look scary".

the military does not use AR15s, and there is a distinct difference between M16s and AR15s. let me know when you've figured out what that is.

 

[janklow]

In other words....I don't have a reason..therefore....there is no reason to own assault rifles

the point is that we should not have to meet your personal standard of "providing a reason soulbrother deems appropriate in order to have this firearm" to have said firearms. because in countries where that becomes the rule, it becomes very easy for authorities to prevent you from owning said firearms for petty reasons.

I thought full auto and hollow points are illegal anyway? most assault rifles folk buy from stores are semi.... everyone should have access to them because criminals aint gonna put them down nor will law enforcement .. law abiding citizens are gonna be the only one this law affects....

hollow-point ammunition is completely legal (except, i think, in some very specific jurisdictions), but there's also plenty of good reason to use hollow-point ammunition. fully-automatic firearms are heavily regulated and have been for some time, but TECHNICALLY not illegal. you are correct, however, to point out that the firearms being discussed are semi-automatic. i would go further and point out that the average guy doesn't seem to understand what semi-automatic even means half the time.

AH YES...

Join the Marine Corps, swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the Laws of the Land and Obey the Orders of those appointed over you...

Then proceed to tell one of the longest tenured and one of the most powerful Senators in the House What the fuck you NOT gone do...

Politics is defiantly not Marine proof.

his argument IS weird, i grant this, but i presume he's arguing she's the one disobeying the Constitution.

 

[janklow]

also, if someone gets the chance and could explain to me why AR15s supposedly being "weapons of mass murder" means a 12-round magazine for a handgun should be banned (and remember, for quite a few handguns, magazines over 10 rounds are neither "high-capacity" nor "extended"), i would appreciate it

 

[The Lonious Monk]

I fail to see how putting restrictions on what weapons can be owned and what can't violates the second amendment. The second amendment only states that we may own weapons. It doesn't say that every single weapon ever made should be available to the public. There is no good reason for civilians to own military grade weaponry. You don't need that kinda stuff for hunting, defending your home, sport shooting, or any other reasonable gun activity.

 

[rage]

1) I love how you completely ignored all the stats a I put up. In Sandy Hook, the VERY FIRST person that got killed was the LEGAL OWNER OF THE GUN. Secondly the vast majority of mass murders are done by legal guns. 35 assault rifles were used to commit mass murders in the US versus 19 rifles.

you can check my previous post for why i take issue with the "35 assault rifles" part. some of them were not rifles, some of them were not assault weapons. check out the source for the data.

2) Your absolutley right I dont think a person who has had a background check and a psychological evaluation should own a gun. AGAIN the VAST MAJORITY OF MASS MURDERS ARE DONE BY LEGALLY PURCHASED GUNS.

you might want to re-read this part, because you're currently saying having a background check and a psych eval should mean no guns. but here's the thing: when you talk about

3) Are you seriously trying to tell me a person who wants to own a weapon of mass murder shouldnt be registered?

i'm saying they're not "weapons of mass murder," and calling them that means you're both unqualified to talk about weapons and probably too emotional to make a serious argument on the topic.

1) Way to ignore the salient point....but I see that thats the theme of all your responses.

please don't start this petting bitching since you're not responding to my points, but merely complaining that i am not responding to yours. much of your posting is "i have a hatred for guns and i am going to be emotional about them as a response," and i am not sure what more you want me to say about that.

2) Again side stepping the actual point....and focusing on minutia.

you didn't pick up on the fact that i don't see a problem with Wal-Mart selling them legally or with high-capacity magazines being sold? because you didn't make a point beyond saying you object, and i do not agree.

3) You need to explain it because you want to own something that has the express purpose of killing lots of people quickly.

no, they don't have that "express purpose," since that's not what mine are used for. and it's not even why they were developed in the first place (rifles, even in the military, are not designed for "killing lots of people quickly").

But reality has to step in when 13,000 people a year are being murdered by guns-

by "assault weapons?" no. and i've said it before: my reality is that we should address what's causing the majority of those murders: the drug trade.

Everybody else isnt dumb, there is a reason the military use assault rifles such as M-16s, AR-15s, AK-47s etc....and its not because the "look scary".

the military does not use AR15s, and there is a distinct difference between M16s and AR15s. let me know when you've figured out what that is.

1) More shell games with the terminology, this shit might have worked before but it doesnt anymore. Just because YOU don't think they are assault rifles doesnt make that so.

2) "because you're currently saying having a background check and a psych eval should mean no guns" This doesnt even make sense grammatically. I have no idea what your trying to say here. What I am saying is that in order to own a gun...any gun you should go through a background check and psych evaluation. I am also saying assault rifles (rifles with the ability to go semi-auto and carry 30+ rounds) should be banned out right.

3) Assault rifles are weapons of mass murder. Plain and simple you are no more qualified than anybody else to come to this conclusion. Guns are designed and built to kill, they have no other purpose. Assault rifles that go semi-auto with extended magazines, this means they kill MORE PEOPLE in a shorter period of time. You are absolutely and completely and inarguably wrong.

4) Seeing that there is nothing wrong with buying assault rifles with extended magazines at Walmart again makes you utterly and completely WRONG. Seeing nothing wrong with stocking Weapons of Mass Murder beside Tires, Baseball bats, diapers, food is absolutely idotic. Again you are no more qualified to make an assessment.

5) What YOU use it for is once again irrelevant. A child could use an ICBM as a slide, it doesnt make the PURPOSE of the ICBM a slide.

6) The drug trade doesnt not cause 13,000 gun deaths. Guns cause 13,000 gun deaths.

7)

Sure they dont.

 

The user and all related content has been deleted.

 

[rage]

nigga still basing his entire argument on hear say and looks...

very little knowledge.

mostly fear mongering...

you worried about the average joe but aint worried about them hood niggas that got HUD in that nice 5 story down the street?

ok....

The hood nigga is looking to survive...I dont have to worry about him walking into a theater and bodying 30 people including me, I dont have to worry about the hood nigga going into a school and bodying 20 kids including mine. The average joe...yes I do have to worry about that.

 

[Jeru the Damaja]

I love how these redneck mothafuckas love to emphasize the fact that the U.S. is a democracy but can't accept the majority's opinion.

 

The user and all related content has been deleted.

 

[rage]

nigga still basing his entire argument on hear say and looks...

very little knowledge.

mostly fear mongering...

you worried about the average joe but aint worried about them hood niggas that got HUD in that nice 5 story down the street?

ok....

The hood nigga is looking to survive...I dont have to worry about him walking into a theater and bodying 30 people including me, I dont have to worry about the hood nigga going into a school and bodying 20 kids including mine. The average joe...yes I do have to worry about that.

holmes had a faulty mag. resorted to a pistol.

school shooting was done with a sig p226...

go educate yourself and quit shitting with your mouth.

You are such a fucking clown....you clearly got ethered by that STUPID as fuck comment about hood niggas. So you have to once again resort to a strawman argument about the weapons used. Which again YOU LIE ABOUT the faulty mag (no information about that has been released)....like that has anything to do with it. Like THAT makes it ok..."he had a faulty"....WTF is wrong with you dumbass.

 

[janklow]

I fail to see how putting restrictions on what weapons can be owned and what can't violates the second amendment. The second amendment only states that we may own weapons. It doesn't say that every single weapon ever made should be available to the public. There is no good reason for civilians to own military grade weaponry. You don't need that kinda stuff for hunting, defending your home, sport shooting, or any other reasonable gun activity.

actually, for sport shooting? you DO need that kind of thing. and what any man wants to use to defend his home should be up to him, not you.

...and frankly, this "military-grade weaponry" phrase remains garbage. is a handgun used by the military now "military-grade" and thus unsuitable for civilians? remember, the military does not use AR15s, they use select-fire rifles.

 

[janklow]

1) More shell games with the terminology, this shit might have worked before but it doesnt anymore. Just because YOU don't think they are assault rifles doesnt make that so.

no, they're not "assault rifles" for the reasons i provided before: because the "assault weapons" mentioned include weapons that have NEVER been labeled "assault rifles" and, in some case, aren't even rifles at all. but i suspect there's a reason you're ignoring that.

2) "because you're currently saying having a background check and a psych eval should mean no guns" This doesnt even make sense grammatically. I have no idea what your trying to say here. What I am saying is that in order to own a gun...any gun you should go through a background check and psych evaluation. I am also saying assault rifles (rifles with the ability to go semi-auto and carry 30+ rounds) should be banned out right.0

"the ability to go semi-auto?" do you even know what semi-automatic means?

3) Assault rifles are weapons of mass murder. Plain and simple you are no more qualified than anybody else to come to this conclusion. Guns are designed and built to kill, they have no other purpose. Assault rifles that go semi-auto with extended magazines, this means they kill MORE PEOPLE in a shorter period of time. You are absolutely and completely and inarguably wrong.

i love how people yell "you are no more qualified than anybody else to come to this conclusion" as if this doesn't apply to them.

but i might be a little more qualified than you on this topic because i know something about firearms while you are doing your damnedest to prove you don't. millions of people own guns they're not using to kill people, so CLEARLY they have some other purpose.

also, telling me i am "absolutely and completely and inarguably wrong" doesn't really mean shit: it's clear you disagree with me, but for all your "i'm not qualified to come to this conclusion" talk, you have no specific debate-resolving status. you know that, right?

4) Seeing that there is nothing wrong with buying assault rifles with extended magazines at Walmart again makes you utterly and completely WRONG. Seeing nothing wrong with stocking Weapons of Mass Murder beside Tires, Baseball bats, diapers, food is absolutely idotic. Again you are no more qualified to make an assessment.

again, YOU are no more qualified to make an assessment, and saying that isn't going to change anything. seeing that there's nothing wrong with Wal-Mart selling AR15s means i don't agree with you.

at this point, i have to note 80% of your argument is "BECAUSE I SAID SO!" classy.

5) What YOU use it for is once again irrelevant. A child could use an ICBM as a slide, it doesnt make the PURPOSE of the ICBM a slide.

no, it's not irrelevant. if that's not why it was designed and built, and if that's not what it was sold for or what i intend it for, the "express purpose" isn't whatever random thing YOU decide it to be.

6) The drug trade doesnt not cause 13,000 gun deaths. Guns cause 13,000 gun deaths.

and you know what causes the vast majority of gun deaths? NOT "ASSAULT WEAPONS."

but of course, the drug trade DOES cause an incredible number of deaths that you're content to use in your death figures while ignoring the fact that those deaths aren't the "OMG weapons of mass murder" deaths you're talking about.

7)

Sure they dont.

yeah, here's the thing: that's not an AR15. the military uses M16s/M4s. did you enjoy blatantly showing your ignorance of guns?

 

[janklow]

I love how these redneck mothafuckas love to emphasize the fact that the U.S. is a democracy but can't accept the majority's opinion.

none of the gun ban talk in this thread is based on majority opinion, it's based on emotions. see also guys who are claiming we're wrong simply because we don't agree with him.

 

[DarcSkies]

AH YES...

Join the Marine Corps, swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the Laws of the Land and Obey the Orders of those appointed over you...

Then proceed to tell one of the longest tenured and one of the most powerful Senators in the House What the fuck you NOT gone do...

Politics is defiantly not Marine proof.

wanna bet nigga?

15 pissed off troops could run that city. have it completely locked down.

think about how many pissed off military there is right now.

then you throw this on top of all the other bullshit!??

to do the governments bidding like that only to come back and be treated like a fucking terrorist?

@Black_Samson

15 pissed off troops? NO. But I get your point. And the majority of military are GOP diehards either from the South or Midwest...

If they wanted to they could run that shit. So u right.

My point is chances are that shit aint gonna happen. And u dont go popping off to a fucking Senator if you value your military career.