NRA in turmoil, gun manufacturers going bankrupt, Thanks Trump

[JSt0rm]

biometrics will go a long way to fixing the problems as well. To all the gun nuts would you rather have more stringent background checks coupled with biometrics so only the purchaser can shoot the weapon or banning most weapons.

 

[JSt0rm]

the reality is people are dying and the pro gun right have no solutions that work and they dont care that it is happening. Trying to have a conversation with one of them isn't going to work because they are psychopaths.

 

[JSt0rm]

How about this one?
View attachment 7846

Can we talk about how fucking poser this gun is? I mean like some failson chud is gonna own this and think he is a man.

 

[senseamp]

We need to bypass the NRA and work with these gun guys, some of them might be liberal on other issues and I bet they are not thrilled with the health care system either. Also, GOP is rigging the political system and the courts to push the country into a corporate tyranny. I think I'd rather liberals bring some of these 2nd amendment guys into the fold than aggravate them with ideas that only sell more guns.

 

[Veliko]

Declaring something illegal and likely turning millions of law abiding people into criminals with a pen is something I have a problem with.

But you're fine with people owning implements that have no practical purpose outside the realm of killing?

Guns aren't mentioned in the constitution any more than swords, katanas, flamethrowers, attack helicopters, and nuclear weapons are. Very few people would seriously try to argue that the constitution gives them the right to own, stockpile, or carry those things around because it is a patently ridiculous suggestion.

Yet right here in this thread there are people arguing passionately that the constitution gives them the right to own guns, even though it doesn't.

 

[kage69]

But you're fine with people owning implements that have no practical purpose outside the realm of killing?

Guns aren't mentioned in the constitution any more than swords, katanas, flamethrowers, attack helicopters, and nuclear weapons are. Very few people would seriously try to argue that the constitution gives them the right to own, stockpile, or carry those things around because it is a patently ridiculous suggestion.

Yet right here in this thread there are people arguing passionately that the constitution gives them the right to own guns, even though it doesn't.

It sounds like you want to argue semantics and terminology, maybe have me explain alternative non-felonies guns can assist with, or defend hunting and open carry.

Any thoughts on my post, or are you just interested in trying to get me to speak for anonymous people that you take issue with? It's ok to highlight what you disagree with, I can handle it.

If you just want to rant about gun ownership in general please just skip the reply. Wouldn't want to waste your time.

 

[Veliko]

The rest of your post was just a deflection onto mentally ill people.

 

[kage69]

The rest of your post was just a deflection onto mentally ill people.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I happen to think this country is seriously lagging on mental health care and screening in general, but especially when it comes to firearms. Suicides alone represent a sizeable annual death rate we could quickly affect.

I think events like Trump revoking Obama era restrictions on gun purchase for the mentally ill is a step in the wrong direction and represents an issue certainly very relevant in the broader discussion of needed gun control. You can downplay that if you want, but as someone who knows too many kids who lost fathers to suicide I'd prefer it if you didn't.

 

[Muse]

NRA in turmoil, gun manufacturers going bankrupt, Thanks Trump

Good riddance!!!

 

[Paladin3]

Oooooooo, tactical. Never saw one of those used for bird hunting among the crowd I hang with. Did see something similar for clearing streets/rooms/buildings though.

It's still a pump shotgun. The barrel is a little short and it probably has the wrong choke, but it's mechanically the same as a gun to hunt birds with. Heck, pump shotguns combos with two barrels are quite common with a short one for self-defense and longer one for hunting.

 

[Paladin3]

biometrics will go a long way to fixing the problems as well. To all the gun nuts would you rather have more stringent background checks coupled with biometrics so only the purchaser can shoot the weapon or banning most weapons.

All you have to do is have the votes to change the law. You seem to keep forgetting that part.

 

[Paladin3]

What I especially find funny is much of what the gun control crowd is calling for could really only be accomplished via unconstitutional executive order if or when they get their candidate in the White House. Which is pretty much exactly what the far right has done with Trump and that the left is so rightfully upset over.

No mater how noble you believe your cause is, you can't disregard the Constitution as an expedient to pushing legislation through. And blaming the law-abiding for the actions of the sick/evil/criminal individuals is adding insult to injury.

 

[JSt0rm]

All you have to do is have the votes to change the law. You seem to keep forgetting that part.

join us for life.

 

[Skel]

No. Pump Shotguns only. Why would you think that would be ok?

I was just trying to sort out if you were going after aesthetics or some other logic. What's the logic in OKing a pump shotgun vs a semi? It's not like that manual cycle take time. Also, are you proposing we limit what ammo to use in the shotgun? Seems to me that a pistol caliber would give a better chance at someone surviving vs a much larger shotgun round.

Oooooooo, tactical. Never saw one of those used for bird hunting among the crowd I hang with. Did see something similar for clearing streets/rooms/buildings though.

Here's an example of aesthetics being the determining factor. It's the same pump action shot gun as the ones used for bird hunting.. it only has a different shell. Also, how many people are you hanging around that clear streets/rooms/buildings?

biometrics will go a long way to fixing the problems as well. To all the gun nuts would you rather have more stringent background checks coupled with biometrics so only the purchaser can shoot the weapon or banning most weapons.

Background checks all the way. I'm a firm believer in them, and believe they should be expanded. Biometrics are a long way away from something someone should trust their life with, which is the whole point of "home defense".

But you're fine with people owning implements that have no practical purpose outside the realm of killing?

Guns aren't mentioned in the constitution any more than swords, katanas, flamethrowers, attack helicopters, and nuclear weapons are. Very few people would seriously try to argue that the constitution gives them the right to own, stockpile, or carry those things around because it is a patently ridiculous suggestion.

Yet right here in this thread there are people arguing passionately that the constitution gives them the right to own guns, even though it doesn't.

I don't disagree with you on what you're post is saying, but you can buy flamethrowers now, and without paperwork or background checks. Oddly enough with the exception of nuclear weapons, you can pretty much buy any of those things you've listed without any government oversight.. I'm not sure you'd get the guns on the attack helicopters, but I did see an ebay auction a few years back... Found a link talking about it

 

[Veliko]

What I especially find funny is much of what the gun control crowd is calling for could really only be accomplished via unconstitutional executive order if or when they get their candidate in the White House. Which is pretty much exactly what the far right has done with Trump and that the left is so rightfully upset over.

No mater how noble you believe your cause is, you can't disregard the Constitution as an expedient to pushing legislation through. And blaming the law-abiding for the actions of the sick/evil/criminal individuals is adding insult to injury.

Your concern trolling is touching.

 

[tweaker2]

I was just trying to sort out if you were going after aesthetics or some other logic. What's the logic in OKing a pump shotgun vs a semi? It's not like that manual cycle take time. Also, are you proposing we limit what ammo to use in the shotgun? Seems to me that a pistol caliber would give a better chance at someone surviving vs a much larger shotgun round.



Here's an example of aesthetics being the determining factor. It's the same pump action shot gun as the ones used for bird hunting.. it only has a different shell. Also, how many people are you hanging around that clear streets/rooms/buildings?



Background checks all the way. I'm a firm believer in them, and believe they should be expanded. Biometrics are a long way away from something someone should trust their life with, which is the whole point of "home defense".



I don't disagree with you on what you're post is saying, but you can buy flamethrowers now, and without paperwork or background checks. Oddly enough with the exception of nuclear weapons, you can pretty much buy any of those things you've listed without any government oversight.. I'm not sure you'd get the guns on the attack helicopters, but I did see an ebay auction a few years back... Found a link talking about it

So then I have to ask, how many people do you know that use this style of shotgun for bird hunting/trap/skeet? As for your latter comment, I have friends in law enforcement in military and local gov't service, of which I have sampled their hardware at their training/qualification cycles. I must say, given how these pistol grip shotguns handle and how so thoroughly muscle memoried I am toward traditionally gripped shotguns, I would never use those for bird hunting/trap/skeet.

Not saying I wouldn't use these types if it was the only one left from a pile, just that I'd have to waste some rounds getting used to them for bird hunting and trap/skeet along with getting used to the funny WTF looks I'd get in the field and at the firing line after showing up with it.

These shotguns may have the same origins but their differing styles are mission specific is all I'm saying.

 

[Paladin3]

Your concern trolling is touching.

I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of anti-gunners having the same disregard for the Constitution as Trump does.

And if a worthless, trite phrase is all the rebuttal you've got...

 

[Veliko]

I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of anti-gunners having the same disregard for the Constitution as Trump does.

And if a worthless, trite phrase is all the rebuttal you've got...

And what is the wider point you're making?

There is very intellectual merit to blandly pointing out instances of hypocrisy.

 

[Paladin3]

So then I have to ask, how many people do you know that use this style of shotgun for bird hunting/trap/skeet? As for your latter comment, I have friends in law enforcement in military and local gov't service, of which I have sampled their hardware at their training/qualification cycles. I must say, given how these pistol grip shotguns handle and how so thoroughly muscle memoried I am toward traditionally gripped shotguns, I would never use those for bird hunting/trap/skeet.

Not saying I wouldn't use these types if it was the only one left from a pile, just that I'd have to waste some rounds getting used to them for bird hunting and trap/skeet along with getting used to the funny WTF looks I'd get in the field and at the firing line after showing up with it.

These shotguns may have the same origins but their differing styles are mission specific is all I'm saying.

And a 12-gauge slug out of either weapon does exactly the same damn thing. Most anti-gunners have illogical hang-ups over the color, grip and style of a weapon as if that's what makes it dangerous. The finger on the trigger and the mind behind the hand is what makes a weapon dangerous.

The only new gun law that will ever make folks safe is a complete ban, which would be unconstitutional and impossible to even achieve. Even then, what would stop someone bent on committing the crime of murder from using an illegal gun?

 

[Paladin3]

And what is the wider point you're making?

There is very intellectual merit to blandly pointing out instances of hypocrisy.

Are you arguing that I shouldn't be pointing it out or that it's not actually hypocritical to want to use Trump tactics to ban guns?

 

[Paladin3]

And what is the wider point you're making?

There is very intellectual merit to blandly pointing out instances of hypocrisy.

And my wider point is the same damn point I've been trying to make since day one: We can't toss out the Constitution, give up our hard won right to due process under the law, and the entire concept of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law just because some of you think it's worth it for the chance (damn slim to none) that banning guns will work.

Continue to debate minutia, reply with trite phrases that say nothing, and try to pick apart the words I use without even addressing my "wider point" all you want. Unconstitutional laws should NEVER be tolerated in this country as a quick fix to any problem.

Or do I have to start posting photos of people who fought and died to provide us with those constitutional rights?

 

[Skel]

So then I have to ask, how many people do you know that use this style of shotgun for bird hunting/trap/skeet? As for your latter comment, I have friends in law enforcement in military and local gov't service, of which I have sampled their hardware at their training/qualification cycles. I must say, given how these pistol grip shotguns handle and how so thoroughly muscle memoried I am toward traditionally gripped shotguns, I would never use those for bird hunting/trap/skeet.

Not saying I wouldn't use these types if it was the only one left from a pile, just that I'd have to waste some rounds getting used to them for bird hunting and trap/skeet along with getting used to the funny WTF looks I'd get in the field and at the firing line after showing up with it.

These shotguns may have the same origins but their differing styles are mission specific is all I'm saying.

I only have gone Clay shooting with shotguns, but I have seen the trap and skeet many times. I can't speak to hunting, but I do think it follows the same idea in terms of style of gun. I've seen quite a few shotguns with pistol grips on them used in all of the clay sports. Some people like them better than the standard original style. The only shotgun I've ever seen that's "Mission Specific" is the chainsaw one. That's prob because from all accounts I've heard/seen, it's unwieldy, though I do vaguely remember it's origins were based in door breaching. Not sure if that's really how it handles as I haven't shot one, nor do I think I will in the future. Unlike some posters ideas that we all have SWAT fantasies, I can't see any reason for me personally to own a door breacher. I'll just call a locksmith, but to each their own.

I find it interesting how the look of some guns can put images into some people's heads. Not to discount your feelings, or the point you're trying to make, as that's not my intent or point. I honestly respect your position even if I disagree personally. I just personally think a gun is a gun is a gun. While staying in the same category of gun, you can change the look of it like you change the style of a car. It'll do the same job (Destroying stuff, I'm not trying to even open up the debate of car vs gun.. the car is for traveling the gun is for destroying), but people like one version over another. I can't help but feel entertainment has put the ideas of what is tac-cool, for both the idiot that think's hell be Rambo in the zombie apocalypse, and the idiot that thanks putting a forgrip on an AR makes it more dangerous. Just my feelings on it, YMMV.

 

[Paladin3]

I only have gone Clay shooting with shotguns, but I have seen the trap and skeet many times. I can't speak to hunting, but I do think it follows the same idea in terms of style of gun. I've seen quite a few shotguns with pistol grips on them used in all of the clay sports. Some people like them better than the standard original style. The only shotgun I've ever seen that's "Mission Specific" is the chainsaw one. That's prob because from all accounts I've heard/seen, it's unwieldy, though I do vaguely remember it's origins were based in door breaching. Not sure if that's really how it handles as I haven't shot one, nor do I think I will in the future. Unlike some posters ideas that we all have SWAT fantasies, I can't see any reason for me personally to own a door breacher. I'll just call a locksmith, but to each their own.

I find it interesting how the look of some guns can put images into some people's heads. Not to discount your feelings, or the point you're trying to make, as that's not my intent or point. I honestly respect your position even if I disagree personally. I just personally think a gun is a gun is a gun. While staying in the same category of gun, you can change the look of it like you change the style of a car. It'll do the same job (Destroying stuff, I'm not trying to even open up the debate of car vs gun.. the car is for traveling the gun is for destroying), but people like one version over another. I can't help but feel entertainment has put the ideas of what is tac-cool, for both the idiot that think's hell be Rambo in the zombie apocalypse, and the idiot that thanks putting a forgrip on an AR makes it more dangerous. Just my feelings on it, YMMV.

We certainly have our share of Tacta-fools in the gun owning population. I can't fault them though, as I enjoy shooting up targets as much as the next guy. The only semi-auto weapon I own is a 9mm pistol and I put it though it's paces for fun until it gets too expensive to dump all that ammo.

But the overwhelming sentiment I see from the folks I've met is the understanding of the sacred golden gun-handing rules: Treat all guns as always loaded and never point a gun at anything you aren't willing to destroy. If someone understands those rules and obeys all other laws, I really don't care how black or scary their weapon is or how extended their magazines are.

Yup, different tools for different tasks applies to guns. But I will never be on-board with the idea that guns, or some guns in particular, have some special ability to turn an otherwise law abiding person into a murdering psychopath. Or that if we just limit the type of action, magazine capacity or color of a gun it will somehow prevent folks bent on killing from doing so.

 

[Veliko]

And my wider point is the same damn point I've been trying to make since day one: We can't toss out the Constitution, give up our hard won right to due process under the law, and the entire concept of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law just because some of you think it's worth it for the chance (damn slim to none) that banning guns will work.

Continue to debate minutia, reply with trite phrases that say nothing, and try to pick apart the words I use without even addressing my "wider point" all you want. Unconstitutional laws should NEVER be tolerated in this country as a quick fix to any problem.

Or do I have to start posting photos of people who fought and died to provide us with those constitutional rights?

And yet you don't actually have a constitutional right to own a gun, merely to bear arms.

Do you believe that this entitles you to own nuclear weapons? Do you believe an entire church congregation is constitutionally entitled to park their M1 Abram tanks outside their place of worship? If not, why you do believe you are entitled to own a gun?

And we know that banning guns will work as we have documented proof of it working.

 

[Veliko]

Yup, different tools for different tasks applies to guns. But I will never be on-board with the idea that guns, or some guns in particular, have some special ability to turn an otherwise law abiding person into a murdering psychopath. Or that if we just limit the type of action, magazine capacity or color of a gun it will somehow prevent folks bent on killing from doing so.

The Las Vegas shooter killed 58 people and injured a further 400+ people in less than 10 minutes. During that time he managed to fire 1100 bullets.

What do you think the death count would have been if he didn't have access to those weapons?

- Less.
- The same.
- More.