The Hypocrisy of Gun Control Advocates

page: 24
129
<< 21  22  23    25 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
You damn right I get a thrill from shooting stuff with fuly auto machine guns!! You probably would too if one did not act as such a self-righteous prude.

Heres some footage of freedom from a Free Gun State.




Shooting up cars with high power machine guns is effin awesome, and gives those who would steal our rights a little sample of what they are up against if they want to violate our Constitution.




posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by DYepes
Shooting up cars with high power machine guns is effin awesome, and gives those who would steal our rights a little sample of what they are up against if they want to violate our Constitution.


Wait, do you have a high-powered machine gun in your possession? Pray tell.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by DYepes
Shooting up cars with high power machine guns is effin awesome, and gives those who would steal our rights a little sample of what they are up against if they want to violate our Constitution.


Wait, do you have a high-powered machine gun in your possession? Pray tell.


I'm not sure what a "high powerd" machine gun is, but, according to the NFA of 1934, citizens in many states can own machine guns if they: get written permission from their local chief law enforcement officer, pass an ATF background check, get BATF approval, pay a $200 tax, and have the bucks. The NFA registry was closed in 1986, so there is a finite number of full auto out there for collectors. A BAR can run as high as 45K and a blue label M-16 runs about 6k-8k. Number of privately owned NFA machine guns used in a crime since 1934? One, and this was by a police officer.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


I was just curious, thanks for clarifying. It's still extremely unusual to see a full auto weapon in any collection. I'm not sure how the very limited number of machine guns in private hands could help "fight the tyrannical government" or any other such fantastical notion.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by Transcendent
 


I'm pretty sure its not your point, but your post re Ferraris etc reads like being able to shoot people with assault rifles, automatics etc is a thrill?

That's not what your saying, right? Because Ferraris and the other things are designed yo give you pleasure or a thrill. Getting this feeling from a large powerful gun seems a bit weird, especially if that ownership is being justified in terms of defence or liberty, or is maybe a penis extension for some inadequate types perhaps?
edit on 19-12-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)




That should answer you question. Like I said, it's JUST like thousands of dollars for a fireworks display times 3000 (night shoot).

Oh by the way... YOU CAN BY ARTILLERY AND ANTI-MATERIAL RIFLES. OMG save us all these people are pure threats for certain.

And as one of the interviewees in the video stated, "This isn't a militia, most of them are professional people: Doctors, attorneys--these are real dedicated shooters and collectors. In order to own one of these guns is such a pain in the hind end, you gotta really want to do this."

There you have it, from the horse's mouth.
edit on 19-12-2012 by Transcendent because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-12-2012 by Transcendent because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-12-2012 by Transcendent because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-12-2012 by Transcendent because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


I was just curious, thanks for clarifying. It's still extremely unusual to see a full auto weapon in any collection. I'm not sure how the very limited number of machine guns in private hands could help "fight the tyrannical government" or any other such fantastical notion.


Well, having spent a few years in Iraq and Afghanistan, I can assure you that you would be surprised what a few determined individuals with rifles can do.

As for the NFA, in my opinion and unConstitutional law, there are a lot of machine guns in private collections but they are very, very expensive and are known to the government and every movement of them has to be registered with the government, so you are right, legally owned NFA weapons are not going to do much and thier owners are not going to risk 100s of thousands of dollars of collectibles.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
I tell you the people who are really hurting us. They're not the gun control advocates who come right out and admit they despise the Second Amendment and will settle for nothing less than a full ban. Those people are out there and they are a force to be reckoned with for sure but the people who pretend they believe in freedom and make excuses for supporting gun control are the worst. Traitors at best. Those people will be right there making the same sorry excuses each time they decide to take away another right.
edit on 19-12-2012 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Could always just ban Americans. After all its not the gun that does the killing, its the owner.



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wotan
Could always just ban Americans. After all its not the gun that does the killing, its the owner.


Sometimes, some people need killing by Americans. See WWII for some examples.



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   
My heart goes out to all those involved in this terrible shooting.


With that said......
I've read through most of the threads concerning this terrible shooting, and to be honest what I find sickening is all the "people" (I use the term loosely) jumping up and down about "How America is the only free country in the world because of all the multiple guns and ammo the "people" own and there precious 2nd amendment and that the rest of us are blind and not free!"

After such a horrific shooting isn't it time America grew up a bit, I'm not suggesting bans or claiming anything like that, because as most American posters will point out like they've done in all other threads so far, to do with this shooting, your not American you dont know what you're talking about. Shouldn't you stop and take a look at yourselves for a sec.

Some Americans talk about freedom like they brought the rest of the world from out of the dark ages, I'm sorry but thats not freedom, its just your paticular style of "freedom" that you feel the world needs shoved down there throats and more recently whilst looking down the barrel of a gun like in Iraq and Afganistan.
When it comes to Americans and there guns they sound to me just like those taliban extremists screaming sharia law, islamic freedom, and the infedals know nothing, whilst beheading or stoning some poor soul to death. Its like two sides of the same coin.

I've seen many American posters sarcasticallly claim cars, knives, drugs blah blah blah....kill people, should they be banned too???

Well, I own a car here in the UK, to do so, first I must pass a driving test, then as a new driver, insurance companies make it difficult for you to own an expensive car to start with by charging a premium for new drivers, I then need the car to pass an MOT MOT? which is every year and road tax either every six months or yearly.

Shouldn't a tool soley designed to kill (self defense or not) have even stricter rules and laws than owning and buying a car, a person before even being able to own or fire a gun should be able to prove safe gun control and have some kind of physc test?
Shouldn't a person who then owns guns have police vist there homes to make sure the owner keeps their guns safe and out of reach of others? If a person in the household is suffering a mental illness, shouldn't someone in some kind of medical or police authority be told, even moving the weapons to somewhere more secure till the person can prove they are safe to be around weapons and shouldn't this be done routinely?

If you want to keep your precious firearms shouldn't you have to prove to your fellow Americans that you and yours are safe to be around!!

edit on 20-12-2012 by Kurokage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by optimus primal

Originally posted by kingmonkey

Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by kingmonkey
 


Your average disgruntled joe can look it up nowadays on the googles in 30 seconds flat and build it in 20 minutes.
So....incorrect.


Examples please?


Google Search results

220,000,000 results. But I'm sure you didn't think I'd actually respond did you?


You can make a bomb with things found under your sink and a pound of nails. You can make TnT in your bathtub.
edit on 18-12-2012 by optimus primal because: Hmmm can't figure out the formatting that will correct the link. It works though, so oh well.


Hadnt really considered whether you'd reply or not to be honest. But you havent answered my question regardless.

I'm well aware that homemade devices are relatively easy to make and all sorts of things can be found on google.

I was looking for examples of bombs going off in the US to back up your apparent point that this is as prevalent as gun crime.



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Kurokage
 




Shouldn't a tool soley designed to kill (self defense or not) have even stricter rules and laws than owning and buying a car, a person before even being able to own or fire a gun should be able to prove safe gun control and have some kind of physc test?
Shouldn't a person who then owns guns have police vist there homes to make sure the owner keeps their guns safe and out of reach of others? If a person in the household is suffering a mental illness, shouldn't someone in some kind of medical or police authority be told, even moving the weapons to somewhere more secure till the person can prove they are safe to be around weapons and shouldn't this be done routinely?

I have viseted the UK a few times and what I remember the most is the amount of rules and registrations you have over there.

Over here we do not have to register every TV and pay a fee for each.
Over here we do not have to have the exact same shingles on our house as our neighbors.
Over here we do not have to hire a professional to do any of our house repairs.
Over here if it's made you can buy it in a store. Normally just a few miles from home.

Basically we don't want to have to think 'government rules' when we purchase or just do something. That's freedom.



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by Kurokage
 




Shouldn't a tool soley designed to kill (self defense or not) have even stricter rules and laws than owning and buying a car, a person before even being able to own or fire a gun should be able to prove safe gun control and have some kind of physc test?
Shouldn't a person who then owns guns have police vist there homes to make sure the owner keeps their guns safe and out of reach of others? If a person in the household is suffering a mental illness, shouldn't someone in some kind of medical or police authority be told, even moving the weapons to somewhere more secure till the person can prove they are safe to be around weapons and shouldn't this be done routinely?

I have viseted the UK a few times and what I remember the most is the amount of rules and registrations you have over there.

Over here we do not have to register every TV and pay a fee for each.
Over here we do not have to have the exact same shingles on our house as our neighbors.
Over here we do not have to hire a professional to do any of our house repairs.
Over here if it's made you can buy it in a store. Normally just a few miles from home.

Basically we don't want to have to think 'government rules' when we purchase or just do something. That's freedom.



Well three of your examples are completely wrong.
And over here, I can't go tooled up like some super solider and kill dozens of children.



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


Not at all, I am an aeroplane enthusiast with a strong appreciation of the Spitfire, which was designed to kill Frenchies ( it was designed in 1934 before anyone tries to correct me) so I understand your point perfectly. Belittling someone else's comprehension skills does not make you seem cleverer, you know?



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by samkent
 


4 TV's in our house,only one licence required, that funds the BBC and means no adverts and no commercial influence over editorial content ( though bias is another discussion entirely)

I don't have to have the same *anything* as my neighbour, as a look up our street would illustrate.

I can hire anyone I like to do repairs if I need to, so I don't know what you mean by that one.

Do you think we can't buy things from stores? Sure there will be things you can buy in the US that we cannot, but it works the other way round too. Choccy hobnobs for example


Oh, you mean guns. Like its an advantage. We didn't have widespread civilian gun ownership in the UK even in the 19th century as your ancestors were committing genocide against the native American people to take over their lands. It wasn't needed then as it isn't now. Its sad that its STILL considered necessary by so many Americans in the 21st century.

For the record, I buy the arguments that they can be fun and that it makes people feel safer from criminals, completely, but you lot surely don't seriously believe that Liberty crap? That makes you just sound stupid.

edit on 20-12-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


Not at all, I am an aeroplane enthusiast with a strong appreciation of the Spitfire, which was designed to kill Frenchies ( it was designed in 1934 before anyone tries to correct me) so I understand your point perfectly. Belittling someone else's comprehension skills does not make you seem cleverer, you know?


I don't see where I belitteld anything. You posted that it seemed weird that someone get a kick out of a high performing machine like a finely crafted rifle and then made the old "penis compensation" comment.

I just pointed out that taking interest in a well crafted and highly functioning rifle is not really different than getting excited about a high performance aeroplane. Same concept really.

If it appears I was making a personal comment, it was not my intent and I apologise if it seemed that way.



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 





We didn't have widespread civilian gun ownership in the UK even in the 19th century as your ancestors were committing genocide against the native American people to take over their lands. It wasn't needed then as it isn't now. Its sad that its STILL considered necessary by so many Americans in the 21st century.


You seem to be forgetting that one of the reasons America pushed it's way into the West, which led to the slaughter of many native Americans. Was because of so many people from the UK moving here we started running out of room for you all.

The people who came here decided that living under the rule of British tyranny was such a crappy life they would rather chance dying at sea than stay over in that dirt pile you call home.

And talk about hypocrisy, how many lands has Britain invaded and committed genocide in?



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


It appears we misunderstood each other as the "penis replacement" comment was separate from my other thoughts and speculation about what owning a gun might mean to a small percentage of owners, I'm sorry too.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 04:06 AM
link   
reply to post by MagicWand67
 



Oh, so it was OUR fault you wiped out the natives?
You certainly have an interesting spin on history there. Maybe a few books are in order? There were many reason for emigration to the US, from lots of countries, but "tyranny" in relation to leaving Britain ,is one you just made up. Maybe you meant the German Jews in the 1930's?

Don't get me wrong, we invaded lots of places, but didn't you ever get told that two wrongs don't make a right? It wasn't a judgement on you, merely a comment that we didn't have guns even back then while all that was happening and gun ownership was demonstrably essential in America.

Your OP was excellent and made me think about different aspects of gun ownership, the one i find myself replying to was just idiotic and insulting. I guess I just touched a nerve.
edit on 21-12-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 06:06 AM
link   
reply to post by steve1709
 


I understand what you're saying, but a just as fair way of looking at it would be to ask, how many Port Arthur Shootings BEFORE Port Arthur ?

None !

How can Sydney have a shooting 'epidemic' if firearms were handed in. Remember it wasn't JUST fully automatic guns that had to be handed in after Port Arthur !

And no matter what else is said..............................what about the EYE-WITNESS reports ? Not just words from a reporter not on the scene at the time, but from EYE-WITNESSES AT THE SCENE ?

Why is THIS over looked ?






top topics



 
129
<< 21  22  23    25 >>

log in

join