Obama's Gun Ban List Is Out

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Okay guys and gals, stupid question time again:

Assuming this list is accurate,

Assuming that I know practically naff-all about guns,

Would it not be easier to say what guns you can own?

So, please illuminate me, a mere disarmed Englishman. What guns are left?




posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Northern Raider
Slick BTW dont forget I am also a pro gun supporter, but iold enough and wise enough to know something has to change.



I agree, but the question is what exactly? The problem in this country is two-fold.

One, we have too many people in our inner cities who are poor, desperate and uneducated. That in turn is leading them into a life of criminal activity. I don't know how to solve that problem. Many of them will reject outside help.

Second, our criminal justice system is also helping to create this monster. We lock up too many two-bit thieves and drug users. Once they go through the prison system, they are often unable to find decent jobs because of the stigma associated with their past and in turn, they also become desperate and turn to a life of more serious crime. Plus, many of those once harmless offenders, upon being exposed to true hard-core criminals while in prison, are transformed into hardened criminals themselves during their stay and are a threat to society once they are released. And, of course, in order to lock up that 18 year old pot dealer, often, an inmate halfway through serving a 25 year murder sentence gets paroled to make room.

That second problem could be solved rather easily by either legalizing certain drugs or drastically cutting the criminal penalties associated with them. The prison system should be for true threats to society, not 18 year old marijuana smokers and petty thieves.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by big gee
" Do some research and make sure what you post is true. If anyone has evidence of any 'list' or 'legislation' pending before Congress then post it so we can contact our representatives, but please stop posting this crap that just makes people upset for no reason. "


Sorry emsed1. I am not from the US and thought this was a new development. I did not intend to upset anyone.


No problem


I apologize for over-reacting! I should take my own advice some times.




posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Nirgal
 


There is a lot that wouldn't be covered by that ban. All revolvers, bolt action and lever action rifles, as well as pump action shotguns would be legal. Some semi-automatic hunting rifles would be spared...for now.

That said, this is a revised list from HR 1022 (which never made it through the House). The original was FAR more restrictive than this. This list has been pared down to only what they think they can get away with right now. Give it 5-10 years, and they'll be back for those that aren't covered.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Northern Raider

2 If they do , how many lives will it save, currently the US loses over 30,000 of its people each year to guns.


I call BS on the over 30,000 people a year. I think somebody's using creative math. That's over 600 people per state per year - I don't buy it. Certainly some of the worst or largest states can manage that number, but there's over 40 states that don't even have 100 gun related deaths a year. That would mean some states have several thousand gun related deaths per year - the only one I can think of that being possible is California, but we don't have a dozen California's. I know in my state nearly every gun death shows up on the News 600 deaths would be everyday on the News and it isn't so. We don't even have that many in the War dying.

In my state there might be a couple hundred deaths at most on a worst year. I think the people who made up those statistics found the state with the most killings in their worst year and the extrapolated it times fifty.

Lies, lies lies and more lies.

I challenge anyone to compile a list of the names of everyone killed in any year of the past 20 years to come up with a list of thirty thousand names. It can't be done cause they don't exist.

Hell even the list of civilian deaths on the entire War in Iraq is less than 30k a year. Iraq Body Count 91,059 – 99,431 violent civilian deaths as a result of the conflict to date.

So according to your numbers there are more gun deaths per year in the U.S. then civilian casualties in the IRAQ war per year. Doesn't make sense because the numbers are BS.

[edit on 13-3-2009 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by verylowfrequency
 


Its true, but indeed, that 30,000 figure does involve some sleight of hand. Check that link I gave for the CDC. Roughly 60% of that 30,000 figure is from suicides. The number of firearm-related homicides is usually around 12,000 per year.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   
This is HB 1022 and it was written in 2007 and so far hasn't gotten anywhere.

I made a thread on this in '07 and I don't think the bill has been retired.

So HB 1022 is sitting up in DC waiting for some super big bad thing to happen and it will get rushed through Congress.

Roper

[edit on 13-3-2009 by Roper]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
JEsus christ this si sick..might as well ban everything except .38 and .22 model rifles or pistols. And above all, the M1carbine? That was patrioticly used during WWII by infantry! Ever notice anyting patrioticly used or accepted, becoems banned? Weird, aint it.
Im not suprised about the SKS or streetsweepers thguoh, ever since i was a kid, i thought they were banned. A friend of mine in mid 90's had an SKS, but it he clip was illegal, banana clip. Streetsweeper, ovbiously, becuase during al copones time, mob used to kill their enemys or harrass.
Now, the weirdes ban i saw their, was the shotgun! How can that be banned! Its not even for long dsitance shooting!
And another observation... EVERY gun scandal ive ever read about in the news, was someone form our governemnt, seeling it overseas, machine guns to bombs. AKA oliver north! and others since.
Its not like honest gun store owners sell illegal machine guns to gangs and criminals! Honest ones that is. Usualy the cops sting places that do. SO! Viscous gang members, and military only are allowed to have guns, to harrass and shoot poeple with (cops included), but i cant have one jsut becaue i preffer a city shooting range instead of the golf course?



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by verylowfrequency

Originally posted by Northern Raider

2 If they do , how many lives will it save, currently the US loses over 30,000 of its people each year to guns.


I call BS on the over 30,000 people a year. I think somebody's using creative math. That's over 600 people per state per year - I don't buy it. Certainly some of the worst or largest states can manage that number, but there's over 40 states that don't even have 100 gun related deaths a year. That would mean some states have several thousand gun related deaths per year - the only one I can think of that being possible is California, but we don't have a dozen California's. I know in my state nearly every gun death shows up on the News 600 deaths would be everyday on the News and it isn't so. We don't even have that many in the War dying.

In my state there might be a couple hundred deaths at most on a worst year. I think the people who made up those statistics found the state with the most killings in their worst year and the extrapolated it times fifty.

Lies, lies lies and more lies.

I challenge anyone to compile a list of the names of everyone killed in any year of the past 20 years to come up with a list of thirty thousand names. It can't be done cause they don't exist.

Hell even the list of civilian deaths on the entire War in Iraq is less than 30k a year. Iraq Body Count 91,059 – 99,431 violent civilian deaths as a result of the conflict to date.

So according to your numbers there are more gun deaths per year in the U.S. then civilian casualties in the IRAQ war per year. Doesn't make sense because the numbers are BS.

[edit on 13-3-2009 by verylowfrequency]


Nup the US govt has no reason to lie, not does the international crime survey, BTW the current toll of dead Iraqi Civilians is set at over 760,000 in the last 4 years, and thats accordording to the IRC and British Medical Council who have asbsolutely no reason to lie.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Of the 1500, you're looking at about 75% young males between the age of 14 and 25 (and getting younger every year), who unintentionally shoot themselves or someone else.

Maybe we should ban young males between the ages of 14-25?

A question to my UK brethren: I saw the stats posted for gun related deaths in the UK but if guns are banned in the UK then shouldn't the statistics be ZERO? Hmm. Maybe only the criminals still have guns?



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by whitewave
Of the 1500, you're looking at about 75% young males between the age of 14 and 25 (and getting younger every year), who unintentionally shoot themselves or someone else.

Maybe we should ban young males between the ages of 14-25?

A question to my UK brethren: I saw the stats posted for gun related deaths in the UK but if guns are banned in the UK then shouldn't the statistics be ZERO? Hmm. Maybe only the criminals still have guns?


Guns are not banned in the UK only restricted, and yes the criminals still have guns, currently on shotguns alone theres over 1 million certificates in operation, we just took steps to stop the loons getting the guns, naturally its impossible to stop all gun crime, but restricting gun ownership has reduced gun crime a bit. What our Americans cousins are saying is let everyone have guns and let them shoot it out thats why you lose 150,000 citizens every five years, no responsible adult can serious suggest that this should continue ?



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by whitewave
Of the 1500, you're looking at about 75% young males between the age of 14 and 25 (and getting younger every year), who unintentionally shoot themselves or someone else.

Maybe we should ban young males between the ages of 14-25?



You dont give babys razor blades to play with, you dont give toddlers bleach to play with, so why give your kids easy acess to guns ?



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Northern Raider

Originally posted by whitewave
Of the 1500, you're looking at about 75% young males between the age of 14 and 25 (and getting younger every year), who unintentionally shoot themselves or someone else.


Maybe we should ban young males between the ages of 14-25


You dont give babys razor blades to play with, you dont give toddlers bleach to play with, so why give your kids easy acess to guns ?

Or knives?

Tools are just tools until some undisciplined and angry person decides to use them as a weapon. Perhaps some parental supervision is required for the use of powerful tools?

If teenagers are gaining access to guns and lack enough self-discipline that they would actually use them on someone else then I would say that's a parenting issue and not a gun issue. In your own country the teens seem to be resorting to knives rather than guns but the lack of parental supervision and self-discipline is the same.

[edit on 13-3-2009 by whitewave]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I did research on UK crime/death,( I have lost the data) but looking at ways people killed each other, "burning to death" was one of the ways women were killed, I thought that method excessive.

So now what do you ban? Fire, matches,lighters, flint, two sticks within two feet of each other?

Roper



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Northern Raider

Nup the US govt has no reason to lie, not does the international crime survey,


The US government has many reasons to lie. Who is the international crime survey? They are FOS - just like these made up statistics.

Again I challenge anyone to compile a list of the names of everyone killed in any year of the past 20 years to come up with a list of thirty thousand names. It can't be done cause they don't exist.

Either provide a list of 30 thousands people that were killed by guns in the U.S. for one calendar year or you're FOS.

Either there's evidence or there's not - anybody can make up numbers. How about putting a name next to each one that can be verified via address, family etc. Nobody can because it's an outright LIE they don't exist.



[edit on 13-3-2009 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by verylowfrequency
 


Well I was going to flame that 30,000 number too but I went to the CDC website and here is what I found:




Number of Deaths Population Crude Rate Age-Adjusted Rate** 29,684 295,895,897 10.03 9.91


This is for 2005...

The Bureau of Justice Statistics says, however, that in 2006 firearms were 'present' in only 9% of violent crimes committed.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
In 2001, 19 hijackers armed with "boxcutters" were responsible for the deaths of 3000+ people so we were told over and over again.

Boxcutters belong the list also.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Northern Raider
 


Now we're on!


I lived in the UK when Dunblaine happened. Has taking handguns away from law abiding citizens stopped gun related crime in the UK?

HELL NO, it didn't! In fact according to your own gov't's reported statistics, gun related assaults and murders has increased by twice what it was in '96 at least. When easy access to firearms was restricted, Brits started happily killing each other with knives and ball bats where a 90lb female has virtually no chance against 20 stone male assailant. Violent crime has risen dramatically in both the UK and Australia after even stricter gun laws were passed.

Here's a little factoid that you failed to mention. How many the 150K gun related deaths in the US were drug/alcohol related? My guess is at least 80-90% of them are drug and alcohol related. Yet the gov't's of the world continue to the fake war on drugs which is destroying both Columbia, Afghanistan and Mexico.

I've personally used a firearm to thwart 2 assaults on myself by both an individual wielding a knife and a gang armed with clubs over the last 20 years. I wasn't in a crime ridden areas when these assaults happened. The knife wielder came at me in broad daylight less than a block from a police substation! He was a drug addict desperate for cash to buy drugs. The gang attack happened in a well lighted roadside rest area where the gang had been assaulting folks sleeping in their cars in South Carolina. The gang tried breaking into my truck when I was sleeping in the camper. I was armed with a semi-auto pistol. I yelled at them to get away from my truck and made a dramatic gesture of racking the slide and letting it snap back. They ran back to their vehicle and fled. I phoned the police from a payphone who arrived about 15 minutes later. Evidently this gang had been targeting the rest areas on the Interstate Highway. They had severely beaten one man and sexually assaulted a woman in the previous week. Again, when they caught these felons, they were a bunch of drug abusers looking for easy prey.

How many folks around the world have been killed by govt's, insurgents or just plain criminals who were unarmed and unable to defend themselves? Look what has happened in Darfur to their disarmed populace or the Jews who complied with the law in Germany during WW2. Or how about your own country's religious wars where thousands were killed for practicing their non state approved religion by the gov't during the 16th and 17th century? Disarm the masses and you can do anything you want to them has been the mantra of gov't's since the time of the Pharaohs.

[edit on 13-3-2009 by crgintx]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   
A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a
detachable magazine, and has:
(i) a second pistol grip,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a barrel shroud or
(iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and
(v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10
rounds.
If this is true nd or passed. Uhhhhhcan someone explain the detachable magazine/threaded barrel
S&W 9mm ???



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Also...

From 1993 to 2001 the rate of FIREARM violence in the United States dropped 63% !!!

NCVS

and there is the oft-cited:




Since adopting CCW in 1987 Florida's homicide rate has decreased 21% while the U.S. Rate has risen 12%.


florida model





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join