If You Need a semi auto to hunt squirrels,You know sqawt about hunting or firearms,period.
As far as conversions go with semi- autos,Is a cake walk with any semi.
Printable View
If You Need a semi auto to hunt squirrels,You know sqawt about hunting or firearms,period.
As far as conversions go with semi- autos,Is a cake walk with any semi.
You can hunt with bare hands :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
Thank you, Jimmy.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
StraightRazorHeaven, We don't give up our firearms in American. I respect your belief in no firearms and your freedom to insult forum members across the pond.
I will go out on a limb here StraightRazorHeaven and say that there are probably several of your Countrymen, who wish they not surrendered their firearms.
StraightRazorHeaven, you want to study criminals? Then ride along with officer anywhere in the U.S. during a shift, your next trip to America. OR,,, walk down the streets of L.A, Miami, Atlanta, Detroit, Philly at night, by yourself taking notes on a note pad.
Your verbiage in your post speaks loudly of your idealogy; ever increasing divide between the rich and the poor in the USA, death is no punishment, available for the masses & the most revealing statement of all from you, "readily governable method of distributing firearms to those who will use them properly",,WOW !
If you know the law in the USA, and you are not a criminal to begin with, you would have to be a complete idiot to convert a legal semi automatic firearm into a full auto . You would be breaking state and federal laws and if you were caught in possession of it, and convicted of possessing it, you would become a convicted felon and lose your right to keep and bear arms.Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
The argument you're presenting is known as a 'straw man' IIRC. BTW, anyone who commits a crime with a handgun in the state of FL is guilty of a first degree felony with a mandatory 25 years with no possibility of parole.
BTW, the only entity that I am aware of that was knowingly distributing automatic weapons to criminals was the Obama administration. I think they've discontinued the practice.
One of the safest countries in the world. Switzerland. What to know why? Because every adult over 18 has spent a mandatory tour of duty in the military. After their service, each goes on inactive reserve. Each is required to keep and maintain both a Fully Automatic rifle and a sidearm. Its hard to commit a crime when every one has the arms. The govt can mandate healthcare with a tax penalty. I believe it is time to mandate the second amendment and FORCE gun ownership. That will put people like a Mr. Holmes in his place.
May I please ask your age?Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
Out of all the full auto weapons that have been purchased or acquired legally there has been only a couple people that have used them to harm another person in a crime. Illegally acquired ones is another story. In the end I think it all comes down to who owns the weapon either it be full auto or semi auto.
OR, you can hunt with a .50 cal. To each his own.Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
Thank You !Quote:
Originally Posted by nun2sharp
Thats sure is a different way to look at it for sure but interesting! thanks for sharing.Quote:
Originally Posted by parkerskouson
There is a difference in insulting somebody and pointing out the flaws in their ideology. I would go out on a limb and tell you that only the criminals wish they had guns. I stand firmly by the fact that if you study criminals you can prevent crimes, this is a rare opportunity to study a man who killed numerous people and survived.
THERE IS:
- An ever increasing divide between the rich and the poor in the USA, and poverty is a proven driving force for crime. One of the reasons poverty can lead to crime is because these people tend to have a lower standard of education (amongst others). This is a PROVEN FACT that cannot be argued against, there have been hundreds if not thousands of studies that show this trend.
- Do you really think death is a worse punishment than incarceration? Here in the UK we try to rehabilitate offenders, however cold ... hard ... time can (IMO) be used as a lengthy punishment.
- "readily governable method of distributing firearms to those who will use them properly" I didn't say this ... I said that there was NO readily governable method of distributing firearms to those who will use them properly, hence my reason for thinking they should not be readily available for purchase.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hirlau
I am 26 Hirlau. Please do not use this against me ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hirlau
No I won't, it's a good thing. Hopefully I will get to hear your thoughts on this issue in 20 more years. I have a feeling we will see eye to eye on a few things.Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
Yes, he could have made a bomb, would he have been successful? Far less likely than if he carries a couple of guns with him. The means is not irrelevant. People should have the means to defend themselves, ask yourself this ... how many unarmed (firearms) countries do things like this happen in?Quote:
Originally Posted by jaswarb
I don't need a semi auto to hunt squirrels. This spring I've gotten 5 squirrels and three rabbits with a single shot pellet pistol at ranges of 10-25yds (and two with a 4ft stick and my pocket knife; squirrels aren't that smart out in the open with no trees around). I just happen to like my 10/22 and don't own a bolt action 22 that's compatible with anything other than .22 short or long. Doesn't work well with .22LR.Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
I think that my 26 years have been long and far more traveled than most. I have seen things most people will never see. I am university educated, and come from a poor region of England where gun crime is a reality. Yet I still wish to be unarmed, did you know that most people who carry ANY weapon end up injured by their own weapon when they come to use it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hirlau
What I'm waiting for in this thread, is for the Texans to weigh in on this topic. It's still a bit early out there; they are still out living it up.
Greece is a restricted country when it comes to guns. Look what has happened in the last 6 months. Hasn't happened in Switzerland yet!Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
That will be VERY interesting!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hirlau
What happaned in greece? Some riots, and would you believe only 5 deaths over 2 years relating to the riots? If the general public had access to guns I believe it could have looked a little more like what happened in Libya.
That may be true, but, If the govt weren't restricting there rights, there wouldn't be any riots. And a loss of one life is a HUGE deal depending on who you are talking to.
What I know is; from your posts, you are committed to your beliefs and no doubt, University educated.Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
For that I truly respect you.
I too, wanted to go to a college in my small town, but I was arrested and at my sentencing was given the choice of 1 year in the state prison or the Marine Corps. The choice was easy at the time. After Parris Island, college never entered my mind again.
You are right, the loss of one life is HUGE. My argument is that we can keep those numbers to a minimum by reducing the availability of lethal weapons. The government weren't restricting their rights, they tried to impose higher taxes because they were failing financially.Quote:
Originally Posted by parkerskouson
I'm posting this opinion as a liberal who sometimes pushes towards socialist.:) You can't legislate all your problems away. Does there need to be some form of gun control. Absolutely. Is making gun ownership illegal the answer. Never. Criminals will always find a way to get guns, legally or illegally. People should have the right to protect themselves.
How many people do you reckon he would have been able to kill with a hammer? How many people there do you think were CCW ? Were they all engaging in a 'shoot out' with this madman old West style, protecting themselves from 'the Indians'?Quote:
Originally Posted by bharner
I think gun protection for self defence is a little over stated. I know if someone came to my house with a knife, and I had no knife, I'd give them my wallet. I guess if they had a knife and I had a handgun I could pull it on them and get away with keeping my wallet and my family safe. But given the level of gun ownership in some countries, I bet the chance of the offender going to the house WITH a gun is pretty high. If I had a knife and they had a knife I guess I'd STILL hand over my wallet, unless my family were threatened.
I just think guns, auto of otherwise, enable more hurt than many other weapons...
Those deaths aren't the fault of guns. People weren't killing people. Deaths happened because of the MASSIVE amounts of people rioting. None of which were intentional I will wager.Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
Is making gun ownership illegal? That really is the question isn't it. I think here we can agree to disagree, I think it most certainly is the answer. I posted a graph on the first page, it shows that as gun ownership drops, so does intentional gun deaths. This isn't conclusive evidence by any means but it goes a long way to making me happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Theseus
Just like to say, this is a good debate on a serious topic.
Regarding the OP, other BS aside:
I'm for them. :tu
My point exactly, would the numbers of deaths increased if the populous would have had easy access to guns (and probably already owned them)? Most definitely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by parkerskouson
Why though? If you all were rioting against the same people, why would anyone have any reason to get shot?Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
Those people were very angry at someone ... They were rioting against the same people ... so, following on from there, why wouldn't they shoot them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by parkerskouson
My self being dumb. apologiesQuote:
Originally Posted by parkerskouson
It would be interesting to know how often this happens; how many lives are saved due to a possible victim having a gun and being in such a position to use it to either injure of kill an attacker or 'warm' them off. It's be interesting to know those figures, and then compare that to the number of people killed by 'man men' with guns. It'd be interesting to know if people getting harmed or killed by attackers RISES when gun ownership is not allowed generally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Theseus
What I mean is, here in Australia for all intents and purposes one can't buy a gun. It's not like the streets are bedlam with criminals controlling the populace via guns; in fact it appears to me that very crimes involve guns, unless it's gang member against gang member. Other weapons ARE used and people DO die, but not tens or hundreds.
Having said all that, South Australia seems to have a LOT of weird murders...
No reason. Uncontrolable temper is the issue. If someone wanted someone dead, there so many other ways to kill them. People kill people, not guns.Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
Oh come on, Parker, are you serious? Unauthorised Discharges were common in the army, with highly trained soldiers, and it's not like Australian soldiers don't know what they're doing. Just a quick Google showed me this:Quote:
Originally Posted by parkerskouson
There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000
Twenty Three thousand in 2000 not common?
I understand what you are saying, and I agree people kill people, but guns certainly make it a heck of a lot easier. Take an ordinary house in the UK. If there was an intruder, and he was interrupted, most likely event is that somebody gets stabbed. More often than not that would not be fatal. Place the same event in a country where gun ownership is legal, and often encouraged, would the scenario be the same? Somebody would die, and it may not be the intruder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by parkerskouson
Sorry about that. All Im saying is that guns aren't the problem. Its the peopleQuote:
Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider
Let's face facts, bombs are difficult to make, require prior knowledge or training and take a heck of a lot of effort. I watched a documentary with the famous Michael Moore, a firearm was offered along with a bank account. Much easier. With all due respect, I don't believe this guy would have killed more than one person had he had no access to a firearm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaswarb
I believe he would have killed more people if he didn't have access to a firearm.Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
He obviously wouldn't have gotten as far with a hammer but look at the atrocities in Rwanda that took nothing more than mob mentality, hate and machete.Quote:
Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider
A tool is a tool.
I'm a pacifist who believes the lives of my children are worth more than the life of someone who breaks in to my home. A bit hypocritical? Yes. But I'm ok with it.
Especially in light of the murders in Connecticut where a family cooperated but the daughters were raped in front of the father and the wife was shot before the house was set on fire. The father managed to escape the fire.
Or the gas station clerks in, I believe, New Jersey who cooperated with armed robbers who proceeded to murder them both after they opened the register.