(Britfag reporting) I seriously don't get that high capacity ammo ban. Its such a ******* weird middle ground between banning guns and not banning guns.
"We want to give them the freedom to shoot up a school, but they're gonna have to reload, and that's when we'll get 'em."
You either think guns are safe, or you think they aren't. You either ban them or you don't. If they are legal, then that is an admission that people are responsible enough to use them for their own pleasure at a shooting range. It makes no ******* SENSE.
20 rounds are infinitely more effective at killing than 0 rounds.
30 rounds are more effective that 20 only because they cut out a 5 second reload time.
If someone can clear up where I'm being retarded that would be a great help to me.
Its a slow but sure way to ban guns and gun related **** while maintaining a facade of gun acceptance.
Even though all gun laws are technically invalid due to the 2nd Ammendment and the Dick Act of 1902.
Overture window. Introduce smaller things in order to get people acceptable to bigger things.
They're gunning for manual reloading by removing a bullet every shooting.
Then once a shooting occurs again they will say "guess we have no choice but to ban guns."
Its always an attempt to appeal to emotion and not logic, when it comes to banning firearms here in the US. Any time there's a school shooting or whatever it's "Think of the children!". The people that want to ban firearms or limit magazine capacity have never held a firearm and are simply scared of what they don't know. They also believe that banning them will get rid of them and make everything peachy keen, but heroin is illegal too, and that's going over really well.
Don't get me wrong, they have good intentions. They want to save lives, and they can't control insane or evil people. But they can control what people buy...sort of. Even if they banned anything, it would only effect people that follow the laws.
People in the gun culture have been fighting hard to keep our firearms...since 1775 as a matter of fact when the king wanted all the powder seized, leading to the Battle of Lexington and Concord.
The shooting range thing though, see that doesn't matter. We were guaranteed our right to bear arms and form well trained militias would not be infringed to prevent tyranny from ruling this land again. Look at history's dictators. Every one of them disarmed their citizens to force compliance. The men who set forth the way government should be run knew that, and made sure it wouldn't happen here..And we've been fighting to keep it that way ever since.
In the US our laws are completely reactionary and based on precident. If they can't pass a gun ban they will take what they can get to try and establish a legal precident to use later. Pretty much they chip away at it
You're not being retarded, you're just showing you have better critical thinking skills than just about all of the anti-gun politicians here, despite living in a country with a very limited firearm presence. That should say something.
I'm American and I have to admit that you aren't the one being retarded. You haven't stated your position on guns in general, though, and I'm just curious about it. I don't really know where I stand on the whole controversy, I just want to keep my rifle because I hunt with that. I have a lot of land and a hunting license, that's pretty much the source of my meat in the fall and winter seasons. I haven't heard any proposals that would ban hunting rifles, though, so none of it really matters to me right now anyway.
Politicians want to be (at least look like they're) doing something in response to all the high profile mass shootings, but there's a hugely influential gun lobby in the United States and no shortage of perfectly law abiding citizens who for various reasons want to have the biggest baddest guns they can get their hands on.
The high capacity ammo ban says "We're doing something about the mass shootings" while also trying to dodge the "They're taking our guns away!" reaction.
While I initially agree that politicians like to appeal to voters, I believe that the endgame of these legislatures in no way concerns the safety of the average citizen.
We americans love our guns. The other countries tend to look at our obsession with confusion then ultimately, superiority. Somehow this perceived view of the outside world has been met by Americans with stubborn pride in our 2nd amendment. We sometimes hold aloft our gun rights like a kid showing off his drivers license to those who aren't old enough; as if we were endowed with more responsibility than those poor plebes because our government allows us to have what their less cool leaders won't. Unfortunately this motivation for gun ownership is inane and ultimately destructive to our country's foundation of freedom.
It is because we think our government is in a position to "allow" us certain things that we are in most of the trouble that we are in today. Under this perspective, we believe that the purpose of government is to solve our problems. We fear the responsibilities that go along with life so we hand them over to our surrogate parent, uncle sam. He greedily reaches for the opportunity to accommodate us in this capacity, whereby his power grows while our freedom diminishes. The Government is not your friend, it is a necessary evil we need to maintain basic infrastructure and should be given as little power as possible. Where that line begins is a matter of debate but where it stops, ends none other then at the right to bear arms. Because no matter how many laws congress passes nor however many executive orders are enacted, It will all be wasted ink on paper if the american people rise up in force and say " **** you, we aint doin' that **** !" This is why the U.S. government makes laws to remove firearms from the hands of its citizens. Not to keep us safe, not really even to satisfy voters for they wont have to worry at all about re-election if they succeed in disarming us. We are our own last defense against authoritarianism. It is well and proper that we not only possess armaments but that we know how to utilize them effectively.
Frankly, I wish they'd acknowledge that the folks that do this need mental care and while the guns are an effective tool to employ, blaming them entirely seems negligent.
Blaming it on mental health would necessitate careful, expensive reforms to national level healthcare programs, and we know how well those go over. Blaming it on guns allows both sides to idle on their standard arguments and look good to their supporters while not actually doing anything.
**jasohazard used "*roll picture*"** **jasohazard rolled image**Would you or any other kind person know the source to this and possibly more like this?
JournalistFag here. We actually have a book that professionals use that dictate what we can call what called the AP Style Guide. There's a huge section about guns that tells you everything from they're called to how to use them.
Any one who doesn't use it (unless you're a big newspaper like the New York Times who uses their own version with minor changes) is an idiot.
I can't speak in behalf of any major news network who normally get this **** wrong, but when a real journalist isn't quite sure whether they're right or not they look it up online. This Stylebook has everything a journalist needs: from grammar rules, how to approach controversial subjects, whether one word is more appropriate to use over another, and other distinctions that a quick google search wouldn't help you with.
Its a lot of satirical humor and parody, interspersed with a suave cast. Its funny enough that you watch it the second or third time and you're still finding new stuff to laugh about
well if you try it and like it: Robin Hood Men in Tights if you haven't already seen it. Pretty much anything directed by Mel Brooks falls into that category as well. I hope you like it.
I agree wholeheartedly. I personally think that Michael Keaton is a fantastic actor, so, if you're down for something a little heavier, Birdman was really good.
I can't speak for him, but I appreciate humor that doesn't require a constant barrage of expletives. Not that I mind the latter, but it has become so common that a nice breath of fresh air is appreciable.
charcoal, Burn a stick and then grind it down into a powder some of it into soft **** and the rest into small rocks kinda like sand but bigger.
Mix that **** together over some time, the Sulfur can be used when its a liquid or as a powder I like the liquid as it speeds up the process. Boom cheep gunpowder load a cassing
You might want to look up the ratios.
For seven dollars and alot of time you have just made some gunpowder congrats.
1. Bullets aren't ONLY for killing people, what about other uses? Range shooting, home defence, hunting... well no actually **** hunting, but those other two?
2. People will just make up their own bullets
3. People would make their own bullets and sell them on the black market, which would flourish
4. You could probably smuggle in cheaper ammo from abroad, like they already do for drugs
5. If you want to kill someone and bullets are expensive, you'll find another way
I think Rock meant that as humour, it would totally not work in reality. Honestly, I have no clue on how to solve the gun problem
except the materials to make bullets are really ******* cheap and its why you can pick up a box of like .22s, 500 count for less than 10 bucks at walmart
Holy *********** witchever place you go to has .22 that cheap might be in a paradoxical time bubble and due to that is unaffected by the price fluctuation and .22 shortage, buy all the .22 they have, sell it online to the less fortunate and report the magical time aura to the FBI or whatever deals with straight up magic.
This is the type of humor the people have at the range I go to, in fact it's what made me buy the Judge they had, salesman was telling me about it and ended with. "What's great about this, is every time you shoot it, doesn't mater where or what you shoot it at, 30 babies die just from the sheer force. That's 30 babies per shot."
I forked over the $450 and have already fired it over 100 times, you're welcome world.
He's a really good cop, everytime we go in we always get a new story about some ******** he had to deal with, and every gun I ask about there's always some sort of sarcastic joke to go along with the facts.
Stuck up gun owners just turn me away really fast.
99% of gun owners in the US are perfectly responsible people and aren't dangerous to the public, unfortunately 1% of gun owners are cunts; and society has to move at the speed of its slowest citizens. And because of them I can't on a grenade Launcher.
And actually you can own the launcher and the nades, you go through crazy amounts of legal hoops and paperwork, but it's possible. A more expensive but less paperwork-intensive would be to buy a Howitzer or a Tank on www.milweb.net/classifieds.php?type=1
Try 99.99999 of all gun owners will never commit a crime, yet alone a murder.
There are 312 Million people in the USA
Yet people murdered by ALL TYPES OF RIFLES (MAJORITY OF THEM ARE HUNTING RIFLES) Are less than 325. (FBI Says 323)
Problem is Gang members with their cheap ass handgun that they got from Jamal the arms dealer that is causing problems.
They don't dare buy them legally because of how easy it can be traced.
Actually the stats are 2 casualties average outside of a gun free zone and 6 in one.
also outside of a gun free zone I think only 4 needed to be stopped by the popo.
**sherlockbatman used "*roll picture*"** **sherlockbatman rolled image**
message admin, threaten with adblock
this isn't the presidential election, he can't make promises like "removing sound ads" and not follow through
It's unfortunate that idiots who act like this represent gun owners on the news. People, who think they're ******* dirty harry and go do **** like "protect the troops" or exercise their right by eating in burger king while dressed in full gear.