I use my ar for coyote hunting and three gun competitons with my brother in law.

You come into a thread where people are expressing their shock, dismay, sadness and anger about this, and you post a glib one-liner... one that happens to appear to be rubbing the noses of people who believe in the importance of the 2nd amendment in this terrible tragedy...

And I'm the douche?

You react to anyone who calls you out on this callous post by calling them names and jumping to the conclusion that they only have their opinion of your post because of their fear that Obama will take away their guns...

And I'm the one who needs to calm down?

Please take a long hard look in the mirror.

i can assualt you with any rifle in the world, does that make them all "assault rifles"?

the word "assault rifle" is a term liberals use to demonize a sporting rifle.



they were invented for killing things, people, animals. the purpose of our 2nd amendment is to arm citizens to protect from a govt overstepping their bounds. i would say privately owning military weapons is a good idea, since going up against a govt with bolt action rifles would be a joke.

look how well not having guns worked for germany in the 30's....

1) The point is I was showing him there are people opposed to alochol
2) The point is that alochol as multiple regulations as well
3) The point is that access to these weapons allows mass murders and serves no purpose other than to feel macho. I have shot guns before. I know you are brain-washed into believing that anyone who doesn't believe you should be handed a gun once you can walk is a liberal, hippy, democrat, socialist, etc but the truth is you are the one without perspective.

Anti-regulation people are the ones who introduced the term assault rifle into this thread.

Your comment on guns in Germany in the 1930s is a complete non-sequitur. That is meaningless. The Nazi party did not gain power through gun regulation.

i have to say i can't read much on it at one time cause it get this sick feeling having kids , but i think i read today he got the guns from his mom? let me look some more...

yes - here some known facts

Adam Lanza visited Sandy Hook school on Thursday and got involved in an 'altercation' with four members of staff

Three of the teachers involved in that argument are now dead

The fourth wasn't at school yesterday and is now being interviewed by authorities

Earlier reports suggested Lanza was 'buzzed' into the school, but police have confirmed he forced his way in

Bodies of the victims have all been identified and were removed from the school during the night

Ana Marquez-Greene, 7, Jesse Lewis, 6, and six-year-old Grace McDonnell among the victims

Teacher Victoria Soto threw herself in front of her first grade class to protect them from the gunfire

Principal Dawn Hochsprung and school psychologist Mary Sherlach were killed execution-style after confronting shooter Adam Lanza

A fourth teacher has been named as Lauren Rousseau, 30

The shooter, Adam Lanza, 20, is confirmed dead

Peers remember him as a quiet and extremely intelligent student who kept to himself and carried black briefcase to class

Brother Ryan, 24, an accountant at Ernst and Young, said Adam had personality disorder

Gunman killed his mother at home they shared in Newtown, then stole her guns and carried out massacre

Reporters broke the news of the massacre to Adam's father, Peter, who is divorced from the mother and lives in Stamford, Connecticut with new wife

Jesus... I have seen one gun lover say to be careful of a Tianmen square and now one saying to be careful to avoid fluffing Hitler or world wars? -_- I have not liked every US government but there will never come a time when it will be necessary for US citizens to rise up with guns to stop them. That is just crazy to even think about.

So disgusting.. those poor kids..

i knew people would gravitate to the gun issue - but i feel the issue is leading up to it that is the problem

of course they did, if the population was armed they wouldnt have been able to occupy the country nearly as easy as they did.

says you, thats the exact mentality that they want an obediant society to have. stay in canada.

Canadians just like banning things. look at how many times that i've been banned for simply being a troll if you need proof.

I can't even tell if you are joking or not at this point. I'll hold out hope :P

Dibs you should be banned in multiple countries ;)

Thoughts are with the families for those who lost their lives.

I have my personal views on guns, but Its from the UK, I see both sides of the arguement on gun control, but for me, my thoughts are on the tragedy.

#RIP

The Nazis didn't occupy Germany... they were the political party in power (you know a political party, like Republicans) and the people willingly went along with them. By the time people were dissenting it was against the state and military. Most people were just mindlessly going along with it and following their orders without question.

I would ask where you learned your history but it is clear...

The military defections in countries which have recently and are currently attempting to overthrow their governments makes me optimistic that in modern days that the military would resist something so brutal as what the Nazis did.

even then, detmer, hitler rose to power through the brownshirts, and they used clubs and fists to threaten and get their way, not guns.

If they take my guns then I will carry some other type of weapon..I live in Arizona where we can open/conceal carry without a permit. Why? Because all the wrong ppl will have them anyway and those who don't carry guns can still die by them.. so you might as well invest in one if you have the right..
No One should tell you, that you don't have the right to protect your own life or someone elses for that matter.. there are shootings all the time over here in AZ that's why I carry a gun.. Iv'e had guns pulled on me when I wasnt carrying and let me tell you it made me think twice about leaving my gun at home.

the one time that i had a gun pulled on me, it wouldn't have done me any good to have had a gun. i didn't see it coming. well, the one time a criminal pulled a gun on me, that is. the police had a tendency to point the things at me everytime they wanted to give me a speeding ticket.

like i'm going to shoot them for trying to give me a ticket. take my license and all that jive, i can't drive 55. can barely do 5 mph on the unicycle. hmmm...

Gun control threads are about like abortion threads... Pointless. Each side will argue all day and night and no one will agree on anything.

Why waste your time Detmer :p

These guys need fully automatic machine guns to hunt deer! That's legit!

The term assault rifle is starting to be very loosely here. Just to be clear assault rifles are not legal to own without a class 3 firearms permit in the U.S... There is a huge difference between an M4 with 3 round burst and a civilian model M4 style AR-15 semi automatic rifle. If you don’t know the difference between a semi automatic rifle and a true assault rifle here is an educational video.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/...ns-vs-semi-automatic-guns

Detmer my point was about overall violent crime yes but what makes you think mentally unstable mass murders will be different than violent offenders.

I posted statistics related to gun ownership rates vs murder rates, you didn't post anything to back up that gun ownership is linked to violent crime...


Requiem please go read about different types of weapons. I'm not advocating fully automatic weapons. Also many hunting rifles are semi automatic and no educated person would look at them and consider them to be an assault rifle.

People will obviously disagree but just know there are no statistics that point towards murder being a gun problem. It is a socio-economic and cultural problem.

ok im sorry, let me be more clear. if people were allowed to have guns it would have been MUCH harder for hitler to slaughter millions of jews. if you argue that point youre just being ignorant and biased.

People had guns while he was killing the Jews... and if you actually think that is relevant to the USA somehow then I'm not sure what to think. The USA would never go out and do something akin to killing 11million Jews/Handicapped/Gays/Prisoners.

Uh, most of the Jews just docilely gave up their possessions and did as asked, assuming the government would not commit genocide... as a Jew I can assure you I am only biased one way and it is not in favor the Nazis... guns had nothing to do with it...

Because it will be much harder to commit mass murder without these weapons...




Because that is not my point... I am not sure why it is so hard for you to understand my point...

locket, you're just the kind of guy that the government wants to have around.

You better do some checking of facts. I would suggest that you start by examining exactly how the Nazi party came to power in the 1930's. They didn't seize the power by force of arms, but by co-opting the elections, intimidating the general population where they were too scared to stand up and defend their democracy.

Check your history.

Yes, maybe in the US we should adopt the tough GUN Laws the have in MEXICO, because there is just so little gun violence there

... do Americans really think their government is capable of the same stuff Nazi Germany did? Jesus. You guys are more fluffed than I thought. I'm done here though. Requiem is spot on about the sense in this conversation.

I know how the Nazi party came to power thanks. I was referring to how they were not stopped for a long time despite opposition at the later stages.

[quote poster=Detmer; 21912; 404296]

Should we ban the following as well since they are capable of killing tons of people?:
Fertilizer (used to make bombs)
Cars
Airplanes
Bottles
Gasoline (both used for molitov flufftails)
...


The weapon ISN'T the problem.

I am not sure why it is so hard for you to understand my point...

http://www.examiner.com/...gan-freeman-on-adam-lanza
^ he gets it

locket, what makes you think the world is different now than it was then? Why would it not happen? Did Germans think it would happen in the 1930's when the Nazi's were coming to power?

The 2nd amendment was specifically put into our constitution so the people would always be able to defend themselves against the government. Human nature has not changed since that moment and I see no reason why we should take our eye off our government. A disarmed populace can do nothing against a tyrannical government. All the other arguments about lower murder rates, lower violent crimes rates, etc, are just background noise which make the case stronger for gun rights.

I was watching this news report on Dutch tv and they showed a photo of a semi-automatic rifle thing and went 'those crazy Americans with their guns' haha. It was almost as biased as a Fox News report on Dutch drug laws.

I'm in favor of tight gun laws but I doubt it makes that much of a difference.

I did wonder about one thing though, these shooters are mentally ill usually and you have millions of people that can't afford insurance in the US so I wonder if they get decent mental healthcare.. I'd be more worried about that then just the gun laws.

[quote poster=Mr. Copper; 21912; 404309]

I understand your point but you are wrong. There will always be crazies. We definitely have major societal issues where we foster this terrible behavior, relative to other societies, however since we can not solve all mental illness we need to stop distributing tools designed for mass killings.

None of those things you listed are made for the express purpose of killing. All of those things are much harder to use to kill people.

The weapon is the problem.

Isn't the US secretly supplying military-grade weaponry to the drug cartels in the first place and didn't the ATF "lose track" of thousands of such weapons that not too long ago in an undercover operation to track down the bigwigs of the cartels? Not to mention the fact that high-powered weapons are constantly being smuggled south to Mexico from their northern neighbor, sometimes with the assistance of government agencies. Real helpful.

locket, if you think for a moment that an American Despot can't arise to oppress America, I have some great real estate for you in Florida just southwest of Miami, I'll even throw in a bridge that you'd have to arrange transport for yourself, the bridge is in New York right now, but you can have it moved like they moved the London Bridge to Nevada.

Yes, they did this so they could track which cartels were buying them and so they could track their movements and see where they end up so they can take the entire connection down. That was their plan anyway

ahahah the States is fluffed. Jesus.

we'll be fine once the socialists quit pushing us around and get real jobs.

yes clearly its the weapon and not the person behind the weapon, we all know its impossible for mass killings to happen without firearms....

yes, you're a deustche. have nice day!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...l-shooting_n_2312186.html


Now, we all can puke.

What ever caused him to do such a horrid act will have to be figured out by what was happening in his life. From being born up to the moment he killed himself. Authorities will analyze and scrutinize his whole life. Specialists, doctors, crime experts, all will determine eventually what went wrong with this guy and figure out why.

Some of us will never understand, even then, why. It's not guns, it's not hitler societies, it's not deep seeded conspiracies by governments causing people to do these atrocious acts of violence. They were not even his guns, they were his Mother's. Maybe his Mother tried to stop him from getting the guns and that's how she was killed, no one knows yet.

I'm a Canadian and no one can say this is just an American happenstance. We have had incidents happen like this here in Canada. Other countries around the world have had incidents like this happen as well. The scale of the event does not lessen the tragedy for it's victims. I don't own a gun. I've never fired a gun, I don't hate guns and I don't blame guns. He could have walked into a school with a steak knife and killed. Would we then lambaste Jim Bouwie instead of gun manufacturers and gun control laws.

Heart felt condolences to the families of these innocent children and adults. God bless those kids and the Teachers brave enough to face their death to try and stop or reduce the carnage.

Every one on the planet needs to learn and teach a better method of dealing with humanities problems than killing each other. Knowing we've been killing each other since we became homo Sapien and began as a species may mean we cannot get there.

The government will use this as an excuse to tighten up gun laws because the last thing they actually want is an armed population that can defend it's liberty.

The United States: Home of the Free, BECAUSE of the Brave!

Jesus christ... you guys are fluffing crazy if you think your government is ever going to enslave you. Wake the hell up. It is a different period in time than when America was first born.

enslave? no

strip us of our rights? theyre currently working on it now with the help of people that think like you.

they scrapped ten over a hundred years ago. next to go will be two. then before you know it you'll have soldiers quartered in your private residence, and when you complain they'll take one from you, to boot.

locket, can you give any evidence to support your claim that tyranny is impossible in today's world? Specifically, what makes it impossible, aside from just "it isn't 200 years ago any more".

If you have spent any time at all studying history, you know that tyranny has been the rule, rather than the exception. Time and time again, humans have proved that when they are placed in positions of great power, they tend to become corrupted to the point of being what most of us would consider evil. The founders of the US did study history, and it is precisely because of their studies that they created a system under which the Federal Government was designed to be virtually powerless in most matters.

We've seen the constitutional barriers to tyranny removed almost entirely in the last decade. The Patriot Act, the 2012 NDAA and Obamacare are the most noteworthy. The three together greatly increase the power of the Federal Government to force its will on the citizens, and greatly reduce the protections we have FROM governmental abuse. I believe that tyranny, far from being impossible, is much more likely to raise its ugly head today than it was pre-2000.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground" - Thomas Jefferson

Bonus post, here's a question! How many assault rifles (by any name) and high capacity magazines are required to defend yourself from tyranny, when the military has cruise missiles, drones, armored vehicles, and nuclear weapons? If some tyrannical government force truly wanted you dead, no amount of armor-piercing rounds would save you! Does the second amendment, in this particular interpretation, therefore allow me to seek anti-aircraft artillery or RPGs to fully defend myself?

I'm sorry, but a "militia" in the traditional has been utterly obsolete since the dawn of mechanized warfare, an age into which every person reading this has been born. Do you really think the National Guard, the Reserves, and all those active military people are going to sit on their asses while this tyrannical government sweeps in to power?

Nobody is trying to take all your guns away, give up with this obnoxious strawman for crying out loud. What I'd like is for somebody to please explain to me how assault rifles and high-capacity magazines are required for sport shooting, hunting, or self defense.

Ask the Afghans . . .

First off.. Strawman? Seriously? You do know what a straw man argument is, don't you? And that just declaring someone else's point of view to be a strawman argument does not automatically make it invalid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

What you are calling an obnoxious strawman argument - the desire to create as many barriers to tyranny as possible - was a driving force behind the creation of The Constitution.

So, since the military has terrible weapons that could overwhelm me, or vaporize entire cities in the blink of an eye, my 2nd amendment right to own whatever weapon you deem unneccessary no longer applies? You're right that if I had an assault rifle (I don't) I wouldn't be of much use with it if I were alone. But the first few words of the 2nd amendment clearly reveal that the founders didn't expect a single person to thwart tyranny alone: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state".. etc etc (I hope you know the rest already). From those words it seems clear to me that the founders were thinking in broader terms than just one guy trying to protect his personal interests from tyranny.

Now, I have a question for you. If 10,000 people stood together against tyranny, facing an army of 1000 opponents with tanks and rockets, do you think the 10,000 would have a better chance of succeess with semi automatic rifles, or with muzzle loaders?

"Do you really think the National Guard, etc, would just stand by?"..

Well, has it happened before? I would argue that it has. And you don't have to look to foreign shores for an example. Throughout our history, the Federal Government HAS committed tyrannical acts, and I can't think of an example where the military stood up to and stopped them. Genocide of Native Americans, sending Japanese Americans to concentration camps, the immoral seizing of private property by a local government in order to give that property to another private citizen... Did the military step in and stop any of these things?

And finally, you ask for an explanation of how assault rifles are required for self defense.. The answer here seems incredibly obvious, but I'll go ahead and type it out anyway. I think this one is best answered by requesting that you answer the following question for yourself: Are "assault" rifles more dangerous than "regular" rifles? If so, then it would seem to follow logically that someone trying to do me or my loved ones harm would be worse off if I did have an "assault" rifle. And if "assault" rifles are not more dangerous, then why do we need to ban them?