AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!
Gun Appreciation Day "Backfires"
- Thread starter Red7227
- Start date
-
** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
- Status
SoTxBob said:Chuck Wollery... who'da thunk it...
I know! Surprised the heck outta me. :lol: :lol:
Bocefish said:
I wonder if this sheriff upholds all aspects of the Constitution, or just the ones that suit him...
Bocefish said:
I don't think anyone's 'blaming' assault weapons, rather they're saying that if they hadn't been available - if the shooter had been confined to smaller magazine weapons, the tragedy would very likely have been less than it turned out to be.
In Aurora the shooter had a 100 round drum magazine - what legitimate sporting purpose does something like that have? And if he had been obliged to reload 10 times (instead of not even once), then if nothing else, that;s extra time for people to escape, seek cover, police to arrive, not to mention having to carry all that extra ammo in an accessible way...
Assault weapons - semi-auto versions of assault rifles and submachineguns - are designed for ease of use in urban environments, and to throw as much lead down range as fast as you can pull a trigger. They also come with a number of mounting rails for various tactical attachments.
Saying that the only differences are cosmetic is a flat-out lie. Many professional soldiers only USE their assault rifles in semi-auto anyway, it's better for accuracy, ammo conversation, and with a good shot one or two trigger pulls is all you need anyway. The DMR version of the M14 only has selective fire for instance, the SLR (FN-FAL) in all variants used in Vietnam was a semi-auto battle rifle. Also used in the Falklands by the brits, and Northern Island. To say a gun has to have burst or full auto to be an "assault weapon" or be designed and used purely for combat is a fallacy.
What exactly is wrong with these ( http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14TacticalRifle/models.html ) for whatever you want to shoot at, or home defense (if you really think a full-size rifle is a home defense weapon anyway), I have no doubt that if the new laws come in they'll be issued with 10 round magazines instead of 20, and the M14 and it's civilian knock-offs are a FAR better rifle than the AR-15, other than for mowing down kids. Furthermore the M14 was ALWAYS a better rifle than the M16, it was phased out because the M16 was cheaper, and used smaller ammo which meant soldiers could carry more of it. I wish I could get one here for target shooting tbh, or even an SKS - cheap as anything, reliable, accurate...
mynameisbob84 said:Bocefish said:
I wonder if this sheriff upholds all aspects of the Constitution, or just the ones that suit him...
Well state officials have absolutely no authority to refuse to uphold federal law, or to impede federal agents from enforcing federal law - explained a bit here:
mynameisbob84 said:Bocefish said:
I wonder if this sheriff upholds all aspects of the Constitution, or just the ones that suit him...
That would be Obama, not the Sheriff, who selectively picks and chooses which parts of the Constitution to uphold despite taking a solemn oath.
Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
Jupiter551 said:
Sweet baby Jesus, how did I missed this?
I enjoyed it. Probably not in the spirit it was intended but it certainly made me smile 
Jupiter551 said:
It is up to federal authorities to enforce federal laws. That is how some states allow medical and recreational marijuana even though it is a illegal on a federal level. Those states just stopped helping the federal government enforce that drug law.
Jupiter551 said:
Correct, but the feds are small in number and often need the states to help. A local police force can say they will not bother to enforce any federal law they want, and unless the state steps in no one can do anything. Depending on the state's constitution even they may not be able to force a local sheriff to do anything.
Regarding gun control, which parts of the constitution are you talking about? Certain elements of regulation with guns have always been in place, and loosening or tightening those restrictions has happened constantly. For instance you can't legally buy a bazooka, or a functional artillery piece. It doesn't contravene the second amendment to specify that some guns are off the table.Bocefish said:
Please, specifically, which of his executive orders are you talking about? Armed guards in schools? Better training for first responders? Background checks enforced (closing the gunshow loophole). High capacity magazines and drums?
Guns don't make people safer, people who own guns are far more likely to be killed by guns.
Shaun: that's true but the local law enforcement can be brought up on charges, and feds can apply all sorts of pressures via funding etc.
Jupiter551 said:
The 2nd Amendment
ETA: Still waiting on the ''official" gun ban list, but I'd bet the M14 is on there. As to the magazine capacity ban law, that's another feel good joke of uselessness. Criminals will surely abide by that one. :lol:
Jupiter551 said:
LMAO, then why do all the rich libs who are in favor of stricter gun control have armed body guards and state of the art security systems? Why do unarmed people call other people with guns when there is a problem?
Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
That's all fine, but NO ONE is even suggesting CONFISCATION OF ARMS. Including the President.
All these RWNJ sheriffs are tilting at windmills.
All these RWNJ sheriffs are tilting at windmills.
Nordling said:
Says the LWNJ who calls sheriffs RWNJ because they won't support any future unconstitutional laws. :lol:
He's not removing your right to bear arms, he said he believes in the second amendment, and he wouldn't dare anyway - he'd never get away with it. There has always been gun regulation, you can regulate types of guns. Automatic weapons are regulated for instance.Bocefish said:
Even if criminals DID get high capacity mags, they wouldn't get as many so overall violence would reduce. More importantly, most criminals and virtually all the massacre dudes bought their guns through the gun show loophole or got someone else to buy it then sell it on. A database showing how many guns are stockpiling, and closing the loophole, AND much much tougher penalties for those who buy guns to sell to criminals will reduce the overall supply on the black market and drive the price up. Both of those are good things.
Even if a criminal had a high capacity mag, wtf would YOU want one for?
Because if you're publicly pissing off gun nuts you probably need protection?Jupiter551 said:
All the current gun laws (over 200 IIRC) haven't done diddly squat and more new laws won't change anything either. Look at Chicago's murder rate FFS. How can anybody with enough sense to walk through a door look at Chicago and think that barring any kind of weapon will stop violence? Those with evil intentions or mass murder in mind can go to any GUN FREE zone and kill just as many people with a couple of .38 revolvers.
Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
Nordling said:
:lol:
What part of the following quote did you not comprehend?
Only a LWNJ would consider them RWNJ for doing so.
Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
Jupiter551 said:
First of all, the cowardly mass murderers almost always shoot themselves as soon as any police arrive.
Secondly, ever heard of speed loaders? :roll: With a little practice I can now reload a S&W .357 revolver nearly as fast as reloading a 9 mm semi-auto clip.
Jupiter551 said:
I don't understand why any new legislation is needed at all, it won't change a damn thing. Political feel good BS IMO for the knee jerk emotional thinkers.
LadyLuna
Inactive Cam Model
- Mar 8, 2010
- 6,710
- 9,440
- 293
- Twitter Username
- @EveMatteo
- MFC Username
- LadyLuna
- Streamate Username
- Lady_Luna
- Clips4Sale URL
- http://clips4sale.com/store/42697/LadyLuna
Bocefish said:
If it doesn't change anything, why do they feel the need to not enforce it?
Seriously, once again, which of the parts of the new law actually attacks the 2nd amendment?
LadyLuna said:
So far, nothing too terrible. However, if the AWB is renewed with the list of weapons I think will be on it, that will go certainly against the 2A. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the government needs to know what weapons we have. Under the new laws, if we register all firearms, they will not be able to be handed down to the next generation or be transferred.
I'm also waiting to see how the mental illness portion is handled. From what I've heard, the proposals will actually hurt people because they may not seek needed treatment (PTSD or even depression for example) for fear of being put on "The List."
- Status
