close to 20 people dead (including children) in CT kindergarten shooting[views:425112][posts:319]________________________________________ [Dec 26,2012 6:33am - DestroyYouAlot ""] I can't find the section where you apply to own an Phobos pattern boltgun. My local police chief has not been overly helpful in this. [img] |
| ______________________________________ [Dec 26,2012 8:29am - the_reverend ""] dreadkill said:But he used a bushmaster 223 like Adam Lanza. This gun is intentionally going around killing people. Ban bushmaster 223s!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!and the award for the most racist sounding gun goes to... Seriously gun sounds racist. |
| ________________________________ [Dec 26,2012 8:55am - xmikex ""] Went home for Christmas. Found out my brother was literally filling out paperwork to buy an AR when he found out about the school shooting. |
| ________________________________ [Dec 26,2012 10:24am - Hoser ""] Wow....I'm glad I stayed out of this one. I already have an AK and an M4. I've watched the thread develop and giggled at the anti-gunners. If the shit ever hit the fan, these pussies will be running for the safety of their armed friends. Also, I like Boozegod. Something tells me that he was a Marine as well? |
| __________________________________ [Jan 1,2013 6:50pm - Boozegood ""] No rifle was used in the CT shooting by the way. Good job again world media. |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 1,2013 7:35pm - arilliusbm ""] I thought it was strange when this first happened that it took a solid hour and a half for them to say something about rifle being used.. and it was apparently found in a car. Then I hear them saying a rifle was used in the school, then there was onle one rifle. |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 2,2013 8:07am - trioxin245 ""] I figured aril bumped this thread to say 'HEIL HYDRA.' I AM DISAPPOINT. |
| _________________________________________________ [Jan 2,2013 11:25am - Arrow NLI ... on weed? ""] Boozegood said:No rifle was used in the CT shooting by the way. Good job again world media. I stopped following the news. When was this claimed? Everything weeks ago said all the shots except his suicide were with the rifle. |
| _________________________________ [Jan 2,2013 1:58pm - ShadowSD ""] Upon researching this, Boozegod is right, search for the NBC Today Show clip with Pete Williams retracting their earlier report. Turns out the gun that was left in the trunk was actually the rifle, and he used the semi-automatic handguns to kill everyone. (Which oddly enough, backs up people on both sides in this thread: the anti-gun control side for pointing out the damage done by weapons other than just rifles, and the pro-gun control side response to that saying any bans would have to affect all weapons capable of firing rapidly.) My take: mistakes like these by the media come from them getting partial information early on, put together with second-hand accounts from witnesses that may not be accurate ("he had a big gun and a little gun" was a quote from a small child that may have added to the misdirection), and the media feeling the demand from the public to report something instead of waiting a couple weeks for investigators to get less tight-lipped; as a result, early reports on details in these sorts of scenarios are always subject to change in the weeks that follow. That sounds a lot less exciting than some alternate conspiracy theory which I'm sure someone somewhere on the interwebz is selling, but it has the benefit of being almost certainly what happened. Chaos leads to a need for answers. Impatience leads to incorrect answers. It's human nature and a story as old as time. |
| _________________________________ [Jan 2,2013 1:58pm - ShadowSD ""] Hoser said:If the shit ever hit the fan, these pussies will be running for the safety of their armed friends. PLS SV ME HOSR |
| _________________________________________ [Jan 2,2013 2:04pm - largefreakatzero ""] Today's media is the bottom of the barrel. Print media can't sell papers, and hence they hire half-retarded nubiles whose idea of research is the first page in a Google search. TV media has always been a piece of shit and is completely bought and paid for by whatever parent company owns the station. It's best to believe nothing you watch or read. |
| _________________________________ [Jan 3,2013 9:26am - ShadowSD ""] Boozegood said:Ah, I see the confusion. Being banned in 1986 means that all Machine-Guns manufactored after 1986 cannot be sold. Exactly, here's the text from the guncite link I posted above, which I probably should have posted from the start for clarity's sake, because I didn't know all the specifics until I had read it myself: "It has been unlawful since 1934 (The National Firearms Act) for civilians to own machine guns without special permission from the U.S. Treasury Department. Machine guns are subject to a $200 tax every time their ownership changes from one federally registered owner to another, and each new weapon is subject to a manufacturing tax when it is made, and it must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in its National Firearms Registry. To become a registered owner, a complete FBI background investigation is conducted, checking for any criminal history or tendencies toward violence, and an application must be submitted to the ATF including two sets of fingerprints, a recent photo, a sworn affidavit that transfer of the NFA firearm is of "reasonable necessity," and that sale to and possession of the weapon by the applicant "would be consistent with public safety." The application form also requires the signature of a chief law enforcement officer with jurisdiction in the applicant's residence. Since the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of May 19, 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians. Machine guns which were manufactured prior to the Act's passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act, but those manufactured after the ban cannot ordinarily be sold to or owned by civilians." Considering how few Americans have died from machine guns in the last eighty years, this level of control shows a track record of success, and disproves the argument that controls don't keep guns out of the hands of criminals. What I really wonder is, since - as you pointed out - you can get a machine gun as a law-abiding citizen despite these restrictions - why shouldn't this be the model for how all weapons capable of firing rapidly are regulated? Personally, all I want is what works, not more gun restrictions in every case: for instance, since the 1934 restrictions on machine guns were adequate, I don't see that the extra regulations in 1986 were necessary; I would be for a compromise that dropped the 1986 restrictions and went back to the 1934 standard for machine guns in return for that standard being also applied to all weapons capable of quickly firing and reloading. That way law-abiding citizens have them, and criminals don't. |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 14,2013 5:12pm - Boozegood ""] [img] |
| __________________________________ [Jan 14,2013 5:28pm - ShadowSD ""] Kent State is just another reason why I wouldn't want armed government security in public schools as a response to Sandy Hook the way the gun lobby in DC is calling for. Good for Ron Paul for standing up to the NRA on that one, unfortunately 51% of Congress gets donations from the NRA and is in their back pocket. Ron Paul blasts NRA plan for ‘Orwellian surveillance state' Texas congressman and erstwhile Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) is distancing himself from the National Rifle Association (NRA)’s plan calling for massively increased security in schools. According to Politico, the Libertarian Paul said that “government security is just another kind of violence.” In a statement on his website, Paul railed against the expansion of federal government powers and characterized the NRA’s plan, as put forth Friday in a press conference by the group’s chief lobbyist Wayne LaPierre as the pursuit of “unobtainable safety,” and said “School shootings, no matter how horrific, do not justify creating an Orwellian surveillance state in America.” “Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal,” he wrote, “because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. We shouldn’t settle for substituting one type of violence for another.” Paul insisted that calls for stricter regulation on guns are doomed to be ineffective because of “the self evident truth that criminals don’t obey laws.” However, according to an extensive study released by researchers at Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health in October of this year, states like Maryland that restrict access to guns by high-risk populations like drug and alcohol abusers and residents under 21 do enjoy lower rates of gun deaths per year. A map compiled to show annual gun deaths by state, including “accidental shootings, suicides, even acts of self-defense, as well as crimes” indicated that, contrary to the NRA’s assertions, rates of mental illness are not at all associated with the prevalence of gun deaths. Regions with high poverty, citizens who largely lack higher education and, most importantly, permissive concealed carry laws that enable minors to carry guns undetected actually feature the highest numbers of gun deaths. According to the study, “Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).” http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/24/ron-...n-for-orwellian-surveillance-state/ Ron Paul will really be missed. I didn't agree with him on everything, but he was the only honest voice among the House majority, and he was never in the back pocket of lobbyists like the NRA. I don't get why the NRA wants to blame video games and advocate government surveillance, it would make more sense for them to take the same pro-liberty approach Paul is taking here for the sake of their own point of view. |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 14,2013 5:42pm - Boozegood ""] ShadowSD said:Kent State is just another reason why I wouldn't want armed government security in public schools as a response to Sandy Hook the way the gun lobby in DC is calling for. Good for Ron Paul for standing up to the NRA on that one, unfortunately 51% of Congress gets donations from the NRA and is in their back pocket. Ron Paul blasts NRA plan for ‘Orwellian surveillance state' Texas congressman and erstwhile Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) is distancing himself from the National Rifle Association (NRA)’s plan calling for massively increased security in schools. According to Politico, the Libertarian Paul said that “government security is just another kind of violence.” In a statement on his website, Paul railed against the expansion of federal government powers and characterized the NRA’s plan, as put forth Friday in a press conference by the group’s chief lobbyist Wayne LaPierre as the pursuit of “unobtainable safety,” and said “School shootings, no matter how horrific, do not justify creating an Orwellian surveillance state in America.” “Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal,” he wrote, “because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. We shouldn’t settle for substituting one type of violence for another.” Paul insisted that calls for stricter regulation on guns are doomed to be ineffective because of “the self evident truth that criminals don’t obey laws.” However, according to an extensive study released by researchers at Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health in October of this year, states like Maryland that restrict access to guns by high-risk populations like drug and alcohol abusers and residents under 21 do enjoy lower rates of gun deaths per year. A map compiled to show annual gun deaths by state, including “accidental shootings, suicides, even acts of self-defense, as well as crimes” indicated that, contrary to the NRA’s assertions, rates of mental illness are not at all associated with the prevalence of gun deaths. Regions with high poverty, citizens who largely lack higher education and, most importantly, permissive concealed carry laws that enable minors to carry guns undetected actually feature the highest numbers of gun deaths. According to the study, “Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).” http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/24/ron-...n-for-orwellian-surveillance-state/ Ron Paul will really be missed. I didn't agree with him on everything, but he was the only honest voice among the House majority, and he was never in the back pocket of lobbyists like the NRA. I don't get why the NRA wants to blame video games and advocate government surveillance, it would make more sense for them to take the same pro-liberty approach Paul is taking here for the sake of their own point of view. I never understand why people like you (that sounds more judgmental and harsh then I mean it to; I just mean people on your side of the 'fence') always bring up Ron Paul, say you appreciate what he has to say, etc. etc. when he stands for almost the exact opposite of what you stand for. Ron Paul in no way wants to keep guns out of schools for example; he wants to keep government enforcers out of school. He absolutely does believe that guns should be allowed in schools (and planes, etc. etc.). Please site the sources on the rest of the article as well because the FBI's own statistics show that non-handguns are behind everything else for homicide-rate. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/tables/weaponstab.cfm Of course that's an all-around statistic; so I would like to see the examples you posted. Not calling you out, I genuinely would like to have a look. EDIT: Though I guess it really doesn't matter because like I said before, I really don't care if it lowers crime or not. |
| __________________________________ [Jan 14,2013 6:40pm - ShadowSD ""] The article I quoted acknowledges that Paul is supportive of gun rights. I also said I don't agree with him on everything, but he's still been an independent voice not owned by lobbyists and so a lot of people respect him for that. I brought up his view on government having guns here because you brought up Kent State. As far as links, I gave you the article link and included its link to the survey map that was mentioned, I can try to look for the one to the actual survey itself if that's what you're looking for. |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 14,2013 6:58pm - Boozegood ""] ShadowSD said:The article I quoted acknowledges that Paul is supportive of gun rights. I also said I don't agree with him on everything, but he's still been an independent voice not owned by lobbyists and so a lot of people respect him for that. I brought up his view on government having guns here because you brought up Kent State. As far as links, I gave you the article link and included its link to the survey map that was mentioned, I can try to look for the one to the actual survey itself if that's what you're looking for. I'll check 'em out. And I didn't mean to come off as harsh or call you out; it just reminded me of the whole Ron Paul support situation. |
| _________________________________________ [Jan 14,2013 7:11pm - Headbanging_Man ""] Has Ron Paul actually said he supports the right to carry guns in schools? I would find that remarkable, if not entirely surprising. Of course it's eminently possible to agree with a few statements of a politician without agreeing with everything they say. Personally, I find Paul, like most Libertarian Party pols (which he really is, rather than a Republican), to be on point on about 40% of all issues; doesn't mean I'm a supporter, but he is certainly correct about the unrestrained growth of police surveillance power in this country. |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 14,2013 7:20pm - Boozegood ""] Headbanging_Man said:Has Ron Paul actually said he supports the right to carry guns in schools? I would find that remarkable, if not entirely surprising. Yes he does; or at least has said so before. It's hard to find quotes at the moment though due to the vast majority of 'gun control' 'guns' etc. 'School' and 'Ron Paul' in search engines gives results related to the previous mentioned statement against the NRA's proposals. I'll get back to you on sources. Here is a quick one for now: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ron-paul-i...roduces-bill-abolish-gun-free-zones Of course it's eminently possible to agree with a few statements of a politician without agreeing with everything they say. Personally, I find Paul, like most Libertarian Party pols (which he really is, rather than a Republican), to be on point on about 40% of all issues; doesn't mean I'm a supporter, but he is certainly correct about the unrestrained growth of police surveillance power in this country. Trying the best to point out the Ron Paul isn't 'actually a Republican' is something else that the 'other side' often does. Ron Paul IS a Republican in the true sense; the others are not (or they are far more left-leaning then what I, and many others, would consider 'Republicans'). Libertarianism and Republicanism are not mutually exclusive. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Liberty_Caucus |
| _________________________________________ [Jan 14,2013 7:54pm - Headbanging_Man ""] Well, he has run on the LP party ticket for Pres, at least in the 1980's. I think his function in the Republican Party is really just to create the illusion of diverse opinions in the ranks anyways; if ideals were more important than career to him, he would have left the GOP ages ago. I don't know who you mean by the "other side", but there are many Republicans who think Paul is too Libertarian for their party, though I don't think it has anything to do with the right-left spectrum. Historically speaking, I don't really think he would have had much in common with any Republicans since Coolidge. |