My Scary Gun Weighs a Ton

originally posted by: ANNED
if assault weapons are so bad why are all the people in Chicago being shot with hand guns that are not even legal for the criminals in Chicago to own.

in Chicago its blacks killing blacks and most of the few legal handguns are owned by whites.

Obama is ignoring black on black gun crime and going after whites with legal guns.

Just like he is letting in illegals that take jobs the African Americans would love to have.

Why does the African American communities still vote for him and the other democrats when in the long run they just make things worse for the African American communities.

Apologies for this statement but I find it really FOOLISH for americans who think it is about LEFT wing and RIGHT wing... There is no such thing in america, the LEFT/RIGHT wing divide is a manufactured control system to let people think they can have a voice / vote where in reality they got none.. Also anyone who hated mainstream media and think this channel more truthful than the other, they all created to serve different wings and every MSM are goverment controlled..

Anyone who see OBAMA or BUSH as the core of america's problem are blinded by the facts that American Presidents are just puppet elected with sham election and sham voting to give illusion of choise to the american people..

Why no one in america realized this when even the europeans (who got locked into the same thing) can see the whole picture that was happening in all the sham western democrazy ?

originally posted by: milomilo
What if they revert to using Elephants like the persians and the cartagenians and break up your legionary formations and trampled your soldiers ????? Ban Elephants too ?

How did the elephants work at for Hannibal at Zama?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: milomilo
What if they revert to using Elephants like the persians and the cartagenians and break up your legionary formations and trampled your soldiers ????? Ban Elephants too ?

How did the elephants work at for Hannibal at Zama?

well... zama was the end of the line for hannibal lol

romans should thank scipio for that, instead of murdering him later

originally posted by: milomilo
well... zama was the end of the line for hannibal lol

romans should thank scipio for that, instead of murdering him later

Scipio Africanus died either of fever or his own hand due to suffering from fever, he was not murdered.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: milomilo
well... zama was the end of the line for hannibal lol

romans should thank scipio for that, instead of murdering him later

Scipio Africanus died either of fever or his own hand due to suffering from fever, he was not murdered.

i wish i can believe that too.. poor guy

originally posted by: milomilo
i wish i can believe that too.. poor guy

Why would you not be able to? His death was well documented, he was a national hero.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: milomilo
i wish i can believe that too.. poor guy

Why would you not be able to? His death was well documented, he was a national hero.

yeah well some writer said it was not natural.. and with the political situation of that time, i tend to believe it.. assasinations practically a national pasttime at that time

originally posted by: milomilo
yeah well some writer said it was not natural.. and with the political situation of that time, i tend to believe it.. assasinations practically a national pasttime at that time

Not natural as in he may of killed himself due to fever. There was never any suspicion of political assassination with Scipio Africanus.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: milomilo
yeah well some writer said it was not natural.. and with the political situation of that time, i tend to believe it.. assasinations practically a national pasttime at that time

Not natural as in he may of killed himself due to fever. There was never any suspicion of political assassination with Scipio Africanus.

seems like a great guy who saved rome in its darkest hour, too bad he met untimely demise from unproven assasination. ah well.. i wonder if romans at that time also banned ownership of assault weapons too..

originally posted by: milomilo
seems like a great guy who saved rome in its darkest hour, too bad he met untimely demise from unproven assasination. ah well.. i wonder if romans at that time also banned ownership of assault weapons too..

As I have repeatedly pointed out he was not assassinated nor was there ever any suspicion that he was.

What is your idiotic comment about Romans and assault weapons have to do with my thread?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

 

Due to the swirling(...)

You know, we, in Europe we cannot have guns for saving our families.
But, still, we have GREAT coverage on news regarding killings...
no hope, no way...
we have any alcohol, though to....destry ourselves.

originally posted by: xoenneox
You know, we, in Europe cannot have guns for saving our families.

Maybe you should do something about it then.

we have any alcohols, though to....destry ourselves.

I suggest you lay off that for a bit, particularly when posting.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: xoenneox
You know, we, in Europe cannot have guns for saving our families.

Maybe you should do something about it then.

we have any alcohols, though to....destry ourselves.

I suggest you lay off that for a bit, particularly when posting.

Look, I know you do not like my posts...I am using my rights to post.... it is your constitutuion, ok?
Maybe, skip commenting my posts, if you have problems..you seem to be...flawed, imho.

you know what -AugustusMasonicus, you are so shallow.

originally posted by: xoenneox

Look, I know you do not like my posts...I am using my rights to post....

Who said I do not like your posts? I just do not understand what you are trying to convey.

it is your constitutuion, ok?

No, it is not.

Maybe, skip commenting my posts, if you havr problems..you seem to be...flawed, imho.

What a bizzare thing to say, you are the one commenting on my posts/threads and you are telling me to skip yours.

AugustusMasonicus, you are so shallow...no more discuss.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Now the question; which rifle is more 'dangerous'?

The AR is... and that is why it is used by the military and not typically a hunting rifle. Also your comparison is apples to oranges. Why not compare this 308 to your hunting rifle 308, and




this .223 to your AR?



When you ask what is more dangerous, I would say the AR with a 30 round clip and 10 more of them in vest. Even your 308 does not have the fire power to rapidly take out a large number of people.

originally posted by: xoenneox

AugustusMasonicus, you are so shallow...no more discuss.

Says the incomprehensible poster.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

The AR is... and that is why it is used by the military and not typically a hunting rifle. Also your comparison is apples to oranges. Why not compare this 308 to your hunting rifle 308...

It was more of a satirical comparison than a ballistics one. The typical anti-gun nut will see the black rifle and think it shoots through schools or some similar nonsense.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

It was more of a satirical comparison than a ballistics one. The typical anti-gun nut will see the black rifle and think it shoots through schools or some similar nonsense.

In the end it is really moot since only about 250 out of 14,000 gun murders per year are actually done with rifles of any kind, and even the 14,000 is moot since we are talking 330 million people and the vast majority of those 14,000 are done by bad people who will kill anyways with or without a gun.

A person could do far worst than any gun with a large truck on a big city sidewalk during lunch hour or at a sports events as 1000s of people wait to go in side. If a person wants to kill they will kill, period.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I would say the gun with the biggest clip and fastest reload is potentially the more dangerous for what I would have thought were obvious reasons.

Scenario A.

I have a big calibre gun holding 6-8 shots and i open up on a crowd - probably kill 2 or 3 people and maim a few more before being overpowered while i reload.

Scenario B.

I have a much smaller calibre automatic weapon with 20-30 shots and I open up on the crowd - still going to kill 2 or 3 people minimum but i'm going to maim a LOT more and I would guess more quickly than i could squeeze off 6-8 single shots potentially giving me more of a chance of sticking in another clip for round 2 before i get overpowered. I would also hazard a guess that people would be more likely to take down a rifleman firing single shots than a bloke with an automatic rifle?

So looking from a public safety point of view which would you say has the potential to kill/maim more people in the shortest time frame?