Biden hints at Obama executive order (concerning guns)

[spidey07]

The good guys take an oath to protect us. And they are trained and monitored.

Going to a gun show, watching a few hours of video, and carrying a gun under my jacket doesn't make me a reliable good guy.

Then I'm sure you can show all the murder/crime committed by the good guys then?

 

[halik]

 

[momeNt]

Obama is mad with power. If the founding fathers didn't think private citizens should have access to assault rifles they would have stipulated as such when they penned the 2nd amendment.

They didn't.

They only knew of muzzle loaded non-rifled horribly inaccurate muskets. Perhaps if they did contemplate that one day firearms would be rifle bored, semi or fully automatic and accurate to the point where you could pick which eyeball you want to hit at 1,000 yards, they would have thought differently.

The fact is we can't dig them out of the grave and ask, so we must instead entrust President Obama to make the correct decision, and given that he was popularly elected in a democratic election, i don't doubt that he will.

 

[Tom]

Since you profess to be unreliable we would appreciate you not doing any of the things you mentioned, I however am reliable and will do all of those things as will many, many others. If the SHTF anywhere near you we would appreciate it if you got the hell out of the way so we can have a clear shot if needed. K thanks bye

I didn't say I was unreliable.

I'm a little worried you think self-evaluation is sufficient for everybody to carry a machine gun.

 

[corwin]

I didn't say I was unreliable.

Yeah you did...

Going to a gun show, watching a few hours of video, and carrying a gun under my jacket doesn't make me a reliable good guy.

I'm a little worried you think self-evaluation is sufficient for everybody to carry a machine gun.

Who's talking about carrying around a machine gun other than you? Hyperbole much?

 

[corwin]

The fact is we can't dig them out of the grave and ask, so we must instead entrust President Obama to make the correct decision, and given that he was popularly elected in a democratic election, i don't doubt that he will.

No "we" don't entrust him to make the right decision, he's a buffoon...that you trust him doesn't surprise me though, sheep follow

 

[Tom]

Your link says those crimes were committed using modified semi-automatic AKMs.

Do you have any committed using actual machine guns? Not modified clones.

I think we all know lots of crimes were commited with machine guns in the 20s and 30s.

then something happened and for a while the use of machine guns in crimes was reduced.

 

[Tom]

Yeah you did...



Who's talking about carrying around a machine gun other than you? Hyperbole much?

The person who I was responding to who you then responded to me, without excluding machine guns, so how am I supposed to know what your position is ?

 

[corwin]

The person who I was responding to who you then responded to me, without excluding machine guns, so how am I supposed to know what your position is ?

Haha...love how things get confusing sometimes...that said even he wasn't saying anyone was going to be carrying them around, they don't conceal too well But they were banned in a (probably) illegal measure, and were doing no harm under the regulations already imposed in the 30's, so yeah the ban should be removed on those as well

 

[Tom]

Yeah you did...

No, I didn't.

I said doing 3 things would not make me reliable and a good guy

That doesn't mean I'm not reliable and a good guy.

It means me doing those 3 things doesn't make me reliable and a good guy.

Point being, anyone doing those 3 things isn't necessarily a good guy.

Because someone said we need more good guys with guns.

Which if that's true, we don't have sufficient controls to be confident that our current system for arming people is going to accomplish that.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Not correct. Rifles were used in the Revolutionary war. Certainly not to the extent of muskets, but the founders definitely knew of them and their superiority to muskets.

They only knew of muzzle loaded non-rifled horribly inaccurate muskets. Perhaps if they did contemplate that one day firearms would be rifle bored, semi or fully automatic and accurate to the point where you could pick which eyeball you want to hit at 1,000 yards, they would have thought differently.

The fact is we can't dig them out of the grave and ask, so we must instead entrust President Obama to make the correct decision, and given that he was popularly elected in a democratic election, i don't doubt that he will.

 

[corwin]

No, I didn't.

I said doing 3 things would not make me reliable and a good guy

That doesn't mean I'm not reliable and a good guy.

It means me doing those 3 things doesn't make me reliable and a good guy.

Point being, anyone doing those 3 things isn't necessarily a good guy.

Because someone said we need more good guys with guns.

Which if that's true, we don't have sufficient controls to be confident that our current system for arming people is going to accomplish that.

That wasn't how I read it but your explanation works for me...in any case the first item on your list is irrelevant and I've already said I support real training and demonstrated ability prior to licensing for public carry, which we have here in Texas, so we're probably really close to agreeing on that issue.

 

[Tom]

Allow again? They were never banned, only heavily regulated. The fact is that since 1934 there has only been one single crime committed with a legally owned machine gun, which from 34-86 they were imported and sold like any other firearm. In 1986 the illegally passed Hughes Amendment stopped the importation, and manufacture of new machine guns for civilian markets, but grandfathered all existing machine guns. Until 86 you could buy full auto AK47's for a couple grand, and yet from 34-86 only one single crime was committed with them.

Sounds like a good case for heavy regulation.

I don't think its too surprising that people who follow the law regarding machine guns don't commit crimes with them.

It doesn't follow from that statistic that making machine guns available to people who, almost by definition, aren't willing to be that conscientious, is a good idea.

But it isn't going to happen so that's not a real issue.

 

[Tom]

That wasn't how I read it but your explanation works for me...in any case the first item on your list is irrelevant and I've already said I support real training and demonstrated ability prior to licensing for public carry, which we have here in Texas, so we're probably really close to agreeing on that issue.

you mean gun shows ?

I've been to a couple, and have a little knowledge about some of the hidden shenanigans that go on at them.

You kniow that scene in 'Taxi Driver' with the gun seller ? We've moved that from shady guys in an alley to fairgrounds across the country, and many dealers masquerading as individuals, and they don't give a damn who they sell to.

Which is also a problem with the internet sales and big box store sales.

In the past being a gun store owner was being part of a community; of course the same thing applies to hardware stores, pharmacies, etc.

Along with all the other reasons for our problems, the lack of community merchants is probably part of our problems with guns, drugs, even porn.

Used to have to really want Playboy if you had to ask Myrtle at the drug store to hand it to you.

 

[corwin]

you mean gun shows ?

I've been to a couple, and have a little knowledge about some of the hidden shenanigans that go on at them.

You kniow that scene in 'Taxi Driver' with the gun seller ? We've moved that from shady guys in an alley to fairgrounds across the country, and many dealers masquerading as individuals, and they don't give a damn who they sell to.

Which is also a problem with the internet sales and big box store sales.

You know this whole line of argument sounds suspiciously like the argument for "voter fraud" being such a big issue that so many want to say is just not really there...but I'm sure what you saw or think you saw at a "couple shows" is indicative of a systemic issue that happens everywhere all the time

And internet sales aren't even close, you still have to go through an FFL to get the gun unless you have your own license...I've bought 4 guns and a shit ton of ammo online in the last year, every time just as much paperwork as if I had bought it from a "community" merchant, in fact I even paid a "community" merchant to hand it over to me, just didn't get raped as badly on the price

In the past being a gun store owner was being part of a community; of course the same thing applies to hardware stores, pharmacies, etc.

Along with all the other reasons for our problems, the lack of community merchants is probably part of our problems with guns, drugs, even porn.

Used to have to really want Playboy if you had to ask Myrtle at the drug store to hand it to you.

So guns, drugs and porn are growing due to the lack of local merchants? I would figure drugs were growing because of local merchants I'll have to agree with you on the Playboy's though:sneaky:

 

[Incorruptible]

No "we" don't entrust him to make the right decision, he's a buffoon...that you trust him doesn't surprise me though, sheep follow

Excellent point, A bunch of people with no respect for the Constitution elected him and didn't care if he assassinates American citizens like Awlaki or violates the rights of Americans. A lot of idiots also voted based on skin color

You are right that he is a buffoon and the sheep will follow him no matter what he does, we have plenty of them on this forum.

 

[xj0hnx]

Sounds like a good case for heavy regulation.

I don't think its too surprising that people who follow the law regarding machine guns don't commit crimes with them.

It doesn't follow from that statistic that making machine guns available to people who, almost by definition, aren't willing to be that conscientious, is a good idea.

But it isn't going to happen so that's not a real issue.

It's only been since '86, and there is NO WAY that semi autos and handguns are going to be put under conditions like machine guns, that's not going to happen ...ever.

 

[zinfamous]

"Whatever that means" is exactly the problem...none of the loonies who want this ban even know what an assault rifle is, they want to ban sporting rifles that "look scary"...ooh, watch out for the boogie-gun

yeah, I know that's the problem, and that's why I pointed it out. Which is why I have my doubts about anything super significant happening.


as to the earlier hilarity:

are you honestly trying to claim that the use of "fuhrer" is completely general and innocent, and in no way is meant to liken Obama to Hitler?

why, exactly, do you think it is apt? What "fuhrer," outside of Hitler, in German history, was known for instituting nationalistic seizures of public property?

Honestly, the onus is on you to explain your assertion that the use of "fuhrer" is so apt. Please, enlighten us as to why the use of a particular german word, which in your mind never references Hitler, is so fucking "apt" at this moment? I am giddy with anticipation at this resounding history lesson with which you are about to distill upon us all.

But honestly, I know why you think it is apt. Your conservatard echo chamber is already tossing this shit out there.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/drudge-features-hitler-stalin-with-link-to-gun?ref=fpblg

 

[corwin]

Excellent point, A bunch of people with no respect for the Constitution elected him and didn't care if he assassinates American citizens like Awlaki or violates the rights of Americans. A lot of idiots also voted based on skin color

You are right that he is a buffoon and the sheep will follow him no matter what he does, we have plenty of them on this forum.

Awlaki needed a missile up his ass and Bush did a lot of the same shit as far as violating our rights, not that continuing that bullshit is a good thing but he was far from the first to do so.

This however is just lunacy based on emotional hyperbole to push an agenda that they were just waiting for the right time to push, doing an end run around the proper channels really puts it over the top

 

[corwin]

yeah, I know that's the problem, and that's why I pointed it out. Which is why I have my doubts about anything super significant happening.


as to the earlier hilarity:

are you honestly trying to claim that the use of "fuhrer" is completely general and innocent, and in no way is meant to liken Obama to Hitler?

why, exactly, do you think it is apt? What "fuhrer," outside of Hitler, in German history, was known for instituting nationalistic seizures of public property?

Honestly, the onus is on you to explain your assertion that the use of "fuhrer" is so apt. Please, enlighten us as to why the use of a particular german word, which in your mind never references Hitler, is so fucking "apt" at this moment? I am giddy with anticipation at this resounding history lesson with which you are about to distill upon us all.

But honestly, I know why you think it is apt. Your conservatard echo chamber is already tossing this shit out there.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/drudge-features-hitler-stalin-with-link-to-gun?ref=fpblg

LOL...it's funny, lighten up Francis

You yourself are making the comparison and seeing parallels so maybe it's denial? If anyone tried to institute seizures of guns it would fracture whatever force they attempted to use to do so...at least right now that is...so no that's not going to happen, but if things keep getting chipped away and nobody speaks up eventually it could happen.

 

[Incorruptible]

Awlaki needed a missile up his ass and Bush did a lot of the same shit as far as violating our rights, not that continuing that bullshit is a good thing but he was far from the first to do so.

This however is just lunacy based on emotional hyperbole to push an agenda that they were just waiting for the right time to push, doing an end run around the proper channels really puts it over the top

He was an American citizen and obama assassinated him, This is wrong how obama violated his rights. Did his 16 year old son deserve to die as well, Its not up to you or obama to decide if he gets killed.

 

[corwin]

He was an American citizen and obama assassinated him, This is wrong how obama violated his rights. Did his 16 year old son deserve to die as well, Its not up to you or obama to decide if he gets killed.

Cops kill citizens all the time for violating our laws and posing a threat to other citizens, he posed a threat to other citizens and was dealt with appropriately, he was actively working with others to bring about harm to US citizens, that he put his own child in harms way is not our fault and in any case how fucked up would that kid have been had he been allowed to grow up?

I fail to see a problem with that one...you play grown up games win grown up prizes

 

[techie81]

I remember this one.

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

Want to live in a world like that ?

Yes, I would love to have a machine gun. Did you know that making something illegal really doesn't stop people from getting said item and using it?

 

[Matt1970]

I remember this one.

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

Want to live in a world like that ?

All the weapons they had there with the exception of the handguns were illegal for them to own proving banning something does little to stop the people who really want to get thier hands on it.

 

[OrByte]

OK a real plan is beginning to take shape from our Administration

The vice president said earlier that "an emerging set of recommendations" focuses on launching "universal" background checks, restricting high-capacity magazines and allowing federal agencies to do more research on gun violence.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...er-executive-order-gun-control/#ixzz2Hc7ocl8W

Universal background Checks
restricting high capacity mags
MORE GUN SAFETY RESEARCH

I'm liking the plan so far...Seems to me the 2nd Amendment is and always has been, safe.