Gotta love the left media....

[SlowSpyder]

Double Post.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: jpeyton
These people rushing to buy guns on November 5th are criminally stupid.

Guns will be the standard for barter if the green collapses. Trading green for guns in this economic enviroment is a wise move.

LOL. I don't know what else to say. Surely this can't be standard thinking?

 

[digiram]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Don't gun enthusiasts say guns are for self defense? What are they defending against if not crime?

Bambi

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Thinking that Obama is going to "grab your guns" should be a crime. Or more appropriately, filed under "paranoid stupidity." CNN probably doesn't have a section of their site for that, so "crime" will have to do.

They certainly have a "Business" section.

Do you honestly believe that there's no chance in hell for another Assault Weapons Ban given a Democrat-controlled government? I believe that it's a perfectly logical prediction and the surge in gun sales doesn't surprise me in the least.

President Clinton signed the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban in September of '94. Democrats had the fairly strong majority in both the Senate and in the House. 2 months later, when elections occured, Republicans took control of the Senate and the House.

So the last AWB took place just months before the end of a Democrat controlled DC, and we're about to see another one in January, so yes it's VERY feasible to predict that we'll see another.

Anyone that doesn't see this as a strong possability is clinically stupid.

(fuck, this computer doesn't have spell check in the browser and it's driving me mad)

 

[PrinceofWands]

Actually there's VERY solid economic sense in purchasing now.

Just before the AWB a 15 round magazine for my Glock 22 was $17.95. Four years into the ban it was $79.95.

Believe me, if Obama says word one about new gun control measures I'm double-mortgaging the house and investing entirely in guns, ammo, and accessories. By the time he leaves office I should be able to retire.


edit: ooops, forgot a 1.

 

[bob4432]

you guys also to remember about biden - even bragged about being anti during the you tube elections. he also was touting just before the election about how "he won't take my beretta...", well many of you may or may not know that beretta makes quite a few shotguns which biden is into, not the pistols that i am sure many people were assuming he was referring to.

also think about feinstein from CA - Feinstein said on CBS-TV's 60 Minutes, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here." In July 2006, Feinstein voted against the Vitter Amendment to prohibit Federal funds being used for the confiscation of lawfully owned firearms during a disaster (think the katrina gun confiscation).

then put mccarthy from ny into the equation and others i am forgetting about....

so add this up and what does it = to you?

you guys also have to expect that a new ban will not be just a reinstatement of the old one - i am sure it would be much, much more controlling.

and the reason why people are buying now is because prices haven't gone up too bad yet, but many dealers are out for some weeks for certain items such as ar15 uppers and other weapons that could be banned.

the obama team has already been at work down playing what he can accomplish from speeches and the promises he made, so going into this w/ that mentality doesn't sit too well w/ me. but hey, i didn't vote the guy in.....

 

[piasabird]

Well Illinois and Chicago and O'Bama have a record of voting for gun bans in Chicago, so there it is reasonable that he will try to do the same thing on the National Level.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Don't gun enthusiasts say guns are for self defense? What are they defending against if not crime?

That's one reason to own a gun. The vast majority of guns are likely owned for other purposes. Another non-criminal reason to own a gun is recreation - hunting and target shooing.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Believe me, if Obama says word one about new gun control measures I'm double-mortgaging the house and investing entirely in guns, ammo, and accessories. By the time he leaves office I should be able to retire.

I don't believe you.

(I don't believe you'd mortgage your house, I do believe you could invest in guns and make a ton of money, I don't believe you could make enough to retire by investing what your house is worth, unless you inherited it)

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Well Illinois and Chicago and O'Bama have a record of voting for gun bans in Chicago, so there it is reasonable that he will try to do the same thing on the National Level.

just chicago and d.c. prove how bans don't work as they have some of the, if not the most strict gun laws on the books and are they not the worst offenders when it comes to murder?

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Actually there's VERY solid economic sense in purchasing now.

Just before the AWB a 15 round magazine for my Glock 22 was $17.95. Four years into the ban it was $79.95.

Believe me, if Obama says word one about new gun control measures I'm double-mortgaging the house and investing entirely in guns, ammo, and accessories. By the time he leaves office I should be able to retire.


edit: ooops, forgot a 1.

you are assuming you would be allowed to sell pre-ban mags during this ban, don't count on it...and therefore it may be wise to buy only what you want and not plan on making $$$ during a new ban as you may lose your $$$.

check out www.jpfo.org for some good reading.

 

[manowar821]

There are people who believe that the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with arming yourself against the government, should it take a turn for the worse. They are true fools.

But honestly, I don't believe Obama will take guns from anyone... I'm really not seeing why I should pass judgment on those who are rushing to buy guns "before they're banned", but I also don't feel the need to do so, myself.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Well, most weapons are bought by criminals. Thieves, murderers, rapists, Republicans, terrorists, etc.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: jpeyton
These people rushing to buy guns on November 5th are criminally stupid.

What other constitutional rights do you make fun of?

Article 1 Section 2 is one I like to poke fun at (though I really shouldn't):

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons"

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Well, most weapons are bought by criminals. Thieves, murderers, rapists, Republicans, terrorists, etc.

Yup, that's why the very strict gun laws in Washington D.C. and Chicago had a huge effect in slowing down or stopping violent crime. Because when they out lawed guns the criminals could no longer get them (since the average gang banger just buys from Gander Mountain, and they no longer carried scary looking guns).

 

[daveymark]

lmfao @ cnn calling the AR-15 rifle an "assault weapon"

 

[NeoV]

yah, cause so many of you need to have an AR-15, even though about .05% of you would have any idea of what to even do with one

you gun freaks never cease to amaze me with your one-sided view of this issue

while I completely agree that the previous assault-weapon ban was not nearly as well defined as it should have been, can you seriously tell me why people need to be able to buy weapons such as an AR-15?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Believe me, if Obama says word one about new gun control measures I'm double-mortgaging the house and investing entirely in guns, ammo, and accessories. By the time he leaves office I should be able to retire.

I don't believe you.

(I don't believe you'd mortgage your house, I do believe you could invest in guns and make a ton of money, I don't believe you could make enough to retire by investing what your house is worth, unless you inherited it)

*whistles off-key*

It's free and clear, just under 200k. With a minimum 400% return likely, and knowing that I live comfortably on 20k per year, I think I'd be just fine.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: bob4432

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Actually there's VERY solid economic sense in purchasing now.

Just before the AWB a 15 round magazine for my Glock 22 was $17.95. Four years into the ban it was $79.95.

Believe me, if Obama says word one about new gun control measures I'm double-mortgaging the house and investing entirely in guns, ammo, and accessories. By the time he leaves office I should be able to retire.


edit: ooops, forgot a 1.

you are assuming you would be allowed to sell pre-ban mags during this ban, don't count on it...and therefore it may be wise to buy only what you want and not plan on making $$$ during a new ban as you may lose your $$$.

check out www.jpfo.org for some good reading.

Nearly every law has allowed for it. Grandfathering is a wonderful thing.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: NeoV
yah, cause so many of you need to have an AR-15, even though about .05% of you would have any idea of what to even do with one

you gun freaks never cease to amaze me with your one-sided view of this issue

while I completely agree that the previous assault-weapon ban was not nearly as well defined as it should have been, can you seriously tell me why people need to be able to buy weapons such as an AR-15?

Don't have to, it's a free society (in theory). That means you have to tell me why I shouldn't.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: NeoV
yah, cause so many of you need to have an AR-15, even though about .05% of you would have any idea of what to even do with one

you gun freaks never cease to amaze me with your one-sided view of this issue

while I completely agree that the previous assault-weapon ban was not nearly as well defined as it should have been, can you seriously tell me why people need to be able to buy weapons such as an AR-15?

You want the government deciding what you "need" and what you can have?

BTW, AR-15s are great and popular target rifles.

 

[Triumph]

Originally posted by: NeoV
yah, cause so many of you need to have an AR-15, even though about .05% of you would have any idea of what to even do with one

you gun freaks never cease to amaze me with your one-sided view of this issue

while I completely agree that the previous assault-weapon ban was not nearly as well defined as it should have been, can you seriously tell me why people need to be able to buy weapons such as an AR-15?

Ah yes, the well founded and well thought out "need" argument. You, in your infinite wisdom, have decided that you do not see the "need" for other people to have an AR-15, therefore YOU have decided to not grant them permission to own them. You have it completely backwards, buddy. No person or government can grant rights, they can only take them away. I have the right to do, say, think, believe, own, etc. whatever I want to, unless there is a compelling reason not to. And "you don't need that" is NOT a compelling reason. It's as arbitrary as me saying that you don't need a 22" monitor, therefore you cannot have one. "But you don't kill people with a monitor!" you'll certainly argue. Well neither do I kill people with my AR-15. "Yes but you might kill someone with your AR-15!" you'll probably argue. Yes and some day you might get wasted, drive drunk, and hit a little 5 year old girl, so I think we need to take away your car to prevent that from happening. After all, you don't need your car.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Well, most weapons are bought by criminals. Thieves, murderers, rapists, Republicans, terrorists, etc.

http://www.stentorian.com/2nda.../leaflets/kennedy.html

The high and mighty Democrats like them too, they just don't want he little people to own them.

 

[brencat]

Originally posted by: NeoV
can you seriously tell me why people need to be able to buy weapons such as an AR-15?

Civilian AR-15s are semi-auto. No different than a semi-auto pistol. Means the trigger must be pulled after each shot. As opposed to military selective fire versions which have a switch to select single-shot (semi-auto), 3-round burst, or full auto.

And who the fvck are you to tell me what I can't buy in a free country?

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: NeoV
yah, cause so many of you need to have an AR-15, even though about .05% of you would have any idea of what to even do with one

you gun freaks never cease to amaze me with your one-sided view of this issue

while I completely agree that the previous assault-weapon ban was not nearly as well defined as it should have been, can you seriously tell me why people need to be able to buy weapons such as an AR-15?

Because their bad shots?

Because they like guns?

Now, tell me why people need to spend millions of dollars for art work?