take that washington

I forgive you.

it is cool, but it is bull crap. this was made 2 years ago by some guy in his work shop, it doesn't even shoot

thats why i said i wished it was real in the description

Shut up. Just...-Sigh-..Shut up. Key Words, ARMED GUARDS. Why do armed guards for banks have shotguns and assault weapons? Because it's needed for their job in case someone tries to steal and no idiot is going to steal from a vault or money truck with a simple pistol. Obamas guards have to be ready for ANYTHING. It's nice seeing how people lack common sense.
P.S. Most of those guards are part of the military. Ever heard of the Marine Presidential Body Guards? It's a job you can pick when joining.

Because simple pistols ARE enough. Your home isn't a fucking military fort. It's not battle of Felucia. It's your damn HOME. A decent pistol IS enough. Your trying to ward someone off your property not commit first degree murder just because someone broke into your house. If this women shot this guy 6 times she must have really shitty aiming and this guy has to be fifty cent or something because I've been shot by a pistol before. Those mother fuckers HURT. One shot you're pretty much DONE with whatever you were trying to do unless you determined enough.
Assault weapons speak for themselves. They're for ASSAULT purposes. You go to war and clear bunkers and what not with them.
A self defense weapon is for self defense. You're not trying to KILL the person unless it's 100% needed and most likely...it's not. Your logic is TERRIBLE and you should rethink your view on the world.

Fallujah*

so what makes it an "Assault" weapon. because last time i checked. a civilian AR-15 works exactly the same as a pistol and a hunting rifle.

also im impressed with the multiple spidey pics. well done on that

what makes it an assault weapon really is just the look. like a bushmaster looks like a carbine. notice how they say assault weapon and not assault rifle? thats because assault rifles have a full auto setting (and a rifle caliber). an assault weapon is any weapon that the liberals dont think we should have because that would give us too much freedom and control over our own lives

Whoa there with the insults, I'm trying to have a simple discussion and exchanging of facts/opinions, try to stay mature about this. Pistols have been proven time after time to NOT BE ENOUGH. Where would you have suggested this woman aim then? She hit him with all six rounds in her gun, she hit him in the torso as she was instructed, and yet it was still ineffective. But you're right my home ISN'T a military fort. To me it's much more valuable, the space where I lay my family down to rest is, in my opinion, supposed to be the safest spot they know of and what I choose to defend my home with is my choice and right. Simply saying "Ohh hurr durr assult weapon means you can only murder people with it!" Makes you seem terribly close-minded and ignorant. You're only serious assertions about defense pistols is that because they hurt people will stop? Or rather because the were enough to hurt YOU that it's good enough? Seriously? Ask any police officer about the issue of their stun guns not being enough or about how the threat of pain doesn't means shit to people who are adamant about harming you. You want to know what pistol's did when intruder's broke into my old home while I was a kid? Nothing. My uncle shot them, they rushed him and beat the shit out of him. I was forced to watch the rape of my sisters that day and do you know why? Because pistols aren't enough. You say that you're not supposed to kill everyone that breaks into your home and I agree, you're not. Yet you seem to think that all people with assault weapons do is open fire the minute they see the intruder. THEY DON'T! They tell them to leave else, they'll have to shot/call the police etc. People who give a shit put their hands up and say "Okay I'm leaving" Or something to the same extent. Not everyone with an assault weapon is looking to blindly murder someone under the guise of self defense, why can't you understand that a man with a tiny hand gun saying get out isn't as scary as one with a AR15?

Lol moving to Canada would be awesome if not for the cold :P. Selective firing/targeting isn't something common people have. The need to survive kicks in and you shoot what you can see. Most don't have the nerve to aim for the knee. Most aren't instructed to at that. Again, I'd like to point out that I'm not saying the point of a self defense gun is to kill whoever's trying to rush you or break in. I'm just saying should things turn into a situation where you need to fight for your life against multiple targets that the currently defined self defense pistols and rounds aren't enough.

As I said before, Either she was a bad shot or this guy was fifty cent or something. The guy RAN AWAY after being shot. Want to know something fantastic about pistols and handguns? You can reload them in the blink of an eye. If there were multiple people who were bent on harming that women in Kansas guess what...she's most likely going to get harmed. Shotgun, AK, M16, SAW, She's going to get hurt. A handgun/pistol is all you need. If a person is BENT on harming you like I said earlier it doesn't matter what you have their going to try their hardest to harm you. If they try their hardest to harm then you shoot their knee caps. They wont be walking any time soon. You don't need an assault weapon to ward people away. A protective dog and a hand gun will do the trick. People are always thinking "WELL WHAT IF THERE ARE LIKE A BILLION PEOPLE TRYING TO HURT ME HERP DERP WHAT IF SOMEONE WONT HER HUR HUR". It's most likely not going to happen to you. They're exceptions but most likely it wont happen to you. You don't need an assault weapon to scare people away because the only way for it to work is to get them before or in the action of doing something bad and they can physically see your weapon. A Desert Eagle and a AK pretty much sound the same.
I keep repeating myself but it's true. I regular hand gun is more then enough to stop someone who isn't bent on hurting you. A regular robber isn't trying to kill everyone in the house. He just wants your shit. He doesn't want a bullet hole in his body or to have a shoot out.
If someone who doesn't put their hands up and say "Okay I'm leaving" then you can shoot them.

She had a dog, he killed it and she only had the six rounds on her, her original intent was that she'd use to scare people away... What I'm saying is that you're right, the ordinary robber isn't going to risk bodily harm for w.e he wanted to take from you. But how can we let that be the defining factor for home defense? Guy breaks in, and it's a 50/50 toss up on if he's actually fucking insane or not? As the old saying goes, "It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." I'm not saying that "like a billion people" are trying to kill me. I've seen what 5 can do. Not everyone is a Marine like yourself, the first thing they think is "Oh shit he's running at me!" not "Time for selective targeting , I better take out his knees". Should that be part of the gun training? Yes I think that'd save a lot of lives. My next point would be that you're suggesting a Desert Eagle for home defense? Is that what you were shot with? Because if so I retract my comment about it being enough to hurt you. A pistol that shoots .50 cal is gonna fucking hurt. But being in mind that it's .50 cal it's no longer considered a self/home defense pistol. It's an armed/active duty pistol. .32 or lower for self defense, and speaking to a Marine, give your honest opinion please. Would you trust your life, and the lives of your loved ones on a six shooter .32? I wouldn't.

Seeing as I would never use a revolver seeing as we're not in the old western times anymore. Depending on where you live you can get a higher gun with a higher ammunition count but low power. (12 shots with .32 ammunition). Whenever I draw my weapon I'll always have extra magazines with me.
If someone is coming at you with murderous intent then by all means shoot him lethally. Heart cavity, Lungs, Brain, Neck, kidneys (Which will cause them to piss themselves.). I would never train someone to kill someone else by shooting in the gut seeing as that's a slow death and they can still do stuff. For instant kills you aim for the upper body. If there are ribs then shoot there.
I didn't know that they took the Desert Eagle of of the home defense. I only said that because it's pretty fucking scary. Shooting someone with it would cause a pretty much instant kill or life debilitating injury (which they could sue you for if you didn't have the proper intent). NO ONE will fuck with you if you have a Desert Eagle. Shoot that baby once and they'll go running. The neighborhood will wake up and call the cops as-well.
Also if your worried about home defense then you should get a alarm system. It's the modern day and those things WORK. A protective dog would be the second line of defense and a fire arm would the the last line of defense.

I understand how to take down a target sir. But thank you non the less for the instruction. What I'm saying is during this ban that's being discussed by the politics. 9mm is going to be the top of self defense rounds. Nothing greater than 9mm. Everything above isn't going to be allowed for civilian use. If you wouldn't trust your life with it. Why would you expect others to do the same? It's not only unconstitutional but also very unfair.

(Completely unrelated note, I'd like to thank you for your sacrifice and service for our country and freedom. I've seen too people take what you guys do/did for granted.)

it's true and I hate people who say that when the 2nd Amendment was written it was referring to muskets that may be true but muskets were the standard military weapon. Also anyone who thinks that the 2nd amendment was about hunting is an idiot. You have to be straight up stupid to believe people who had just led a bloody and hard fought revolution against a tyrannical government that were writing the constitution of a new country only meant for people to have guns as a means for hunting

exactly so many politicians forget that the final straw for the American Revolution was that resulted in the battle of Lexington and Concord the famous "shot heard round the world" was the British attempt to seize an armory to keep the Americans having guns

I hope it doesn't come to that but if it does I will fight

It's people like you that make me depressed that I get shot for. As a Marine who's been deployed to Afghan I'll say people aren't savage. Crazy people are savage. Do you think that I WANT to kill people? Do you really think the people the Taliban force to attack us WANT to attack us? You don't know shit about the real world. This government is perfectly fine the way it is. You don't chop down the apple tree just because a couple apples are rotten. Our government has some kinks in it (corruption) but it doesn't make it BAD. You're the people who vote for the damn politicians anyways.

I dont understand why people feel so passionately about having assault rifles. And i hate when people say they will fight the government if they try to take them away. Its basically saying "fuck you for your service" to anybody in the military. I for one would like to thank you for your service

Just saying you're lucky this is the internet. If not I'd punch you in the face since you don't know what it's like. Also your going to become an officer. Big whoop. You automatically rank up to a Second Lieutenant because you have a bachelors degree in something that's more then 90% it's not related to the military. You get to command people and work nice hours and walk around like you have a giant dick just because you have a bachelors degree while the rest of us enlistees are fighting the damn war and you puss out and become an officer. Unless you're a combat officer your useless in my eyes. Also humans are social animals. If you really think we're going to be every man for himself then explain how our ancestors got along. Explain how they didn't kill everyone else and secluded themselves from the others. Oh wait you cant because they formed Tribes which formed into something else which ultimately formed into countries and governments. You're an idiot who obviously doesn't have a damn clue about the world and is contently fed titty milk because you're not man enough to drink the damn coffee black. I've had FRIENDS that died in my deployment. CRAZY people want to kill people. Humans don't instinctively want to kill another human being.

Tough guy? Your insulting my military experience and title. Something I worked HARD to get while you haven't done crap and pretending that you have the dick of a horse. If you think of the atrocities humanity caused you realize those people weren't SANE. Gangis Kahn, Hitler, Stalin, Whoever was in charge of Japan during WW2, Slave traders, The Roman Catholic church, The leaders to terrorist organizations, ect. They aren't SANE people. People will fight to survive but not everyone is going to kill everyone else or do harm to one another to survive. They'll pair up and survive and if a threat enters their group they deal with it the same way the primitive tribes did. Shut up and think for a second.

they are trying to disarm "us idiots" from killing each other with guns? more people were stabbed to death, or beaten to death in the last year, than killed with an "assault rifle" why arent they banning knives or fists.

H&H nail gun.

i waiting for someone to say it!

ouch

Oh anon.
Yeast Rising got me.

OP's special gun

imagine a suicidal homophobe

dead space 2 .. its if you lose the fight agents his dead girlfriend

i didn't even know that there were fight agents in dead space 2

all the necromorphs are agents...

AGENTS OF AWESOOMEEE



jk those fuckers r scary

netter name

before commenting on anything political.

Thank you sir. I was about to go on a long tirade about how the 2nd Amendment is outdated and largely unnecessary but taking the time to read your post made me remember that arguing on the internet is ultimately a gigantic waste of time.

i agree with you about the 2nd amendment, though.

I honestly would like to hear your logic surrounding how it's outdated and unecessary. I mean not to start and argument or anything, I am just genuinly curious. I also disagree entirely though. To some of us, keeping guns is really just a hobby. The problem will always be people. I mean, if guns are responsible for violence and killing, then pencils are responsible for spelling errors.

This is just my opinion on the matter. But this is the 21st century.
the 2nd amendment is to protect the "free state" and thus can be interpreted as people's power to fight back against the government should they turn totalitarian or something.
the papers were signed over 300 years ago, where there were still monarchies. To have a government go rogue on its country at this time is simply impossible. First of all, the government would have to convince a majority of congress/ every other political position that turning against the country is a good idea. Not just federal government, but state governments, municipal governments, you get the idea. And they're just not going to agree with it. Also, in order to turn against the country, you must have an army entirely yours to command. The people that join the army mostly join by freewill and want to protect their country, not take over it. Not only will challenging the freedom in the country cause massive uproar that nobody could possibly contain, it will receive possibly negative views from the rest of the world. So you have a civil war and the rest of the world fighting against you. No matter how you look at it, it's extremely risky, if not flat out impossible, to challenge the status quo.

Yeah, alright I can agree that our own government turning on us, is probably(I do have to say probably) never going to happen in this day and age. But I'd also say, what if someone else takes over? I mean, we are the United States so chances of that are (fucking)slim too. But if our government were to undergo a radical change perhaps as a result of a hostile takeover by a different governing body. . . we WOULD be protecting the "free state." It does SEEM grossly outdated, but then again what real harm does it cause to leave it alone too? Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it. I believe that is the logic behind the amendment as well. Maybe we could update it a little. But to be fair, I don't think it will ever be completely unecessary. I feel any laws in place or implemented in the future to help prevent gun related acts of violence, should honestly be more to help make what we have, more safe through awareness and proper handling, not restrictions and control. If someone wants to break the law, they're not going to be deterred by adding more laws. Either way, thanks for being reasonable, but you can't tell me you don't agree with me here, even a tiny bit. The amendment was ALWAYS a "what if."

I find it really dumb of you to completely ignore the logic behind the comparison. Stupid to compare it to pencils? Fine, go get a gun, set it on the table and wait for it to kill you. At the same time, also purchase a pencil, set it down next to some paper, and wait for it to mess up. Fuck it let them race each other. I didn't say a gun is as dangerous as a pencil, just that neither of them are responsible for killing, or writing mistakes respectively. I find it funny you decide to use New York to try and prove your point against me. New York has the MOST RESTRICTIVE gun laws in the ENTIRE COUNTRY. By yours and everyone elses logic, it should be the safest place to live. Not even fucking close.

Don't trust our cops to protect us? Average response time is 8 minutes. What can someone do in 8 minutes and get away. Pretty much whatever they want.
But I suppose if we ban guns there will be nothing left to kill someone with. Let's also get started on banning all blunt objects, all sharp objects, all writing utensils, all eating utensils, anything flammable, and hell cutting off our own limbs. Nobody is going to find an alternative to guns? Maybe we get rid of all guns and the country just decides. Oh well I was a law breaking cock sucker before, but now that guns are illegal I guess now would be a good time to start caring. People who would follow the law are now left defenseless. They'd have to confiscate all firearms in the country, even then they only know about the registered ones. Illegally obtained ones won't be any less illegal.

You say we could have good healthcare. But we can't have "good" universal healthcare. It's not going to happen. People liked to compare us to Canada when making that point. Well shit did nobody stop to think the population of Canada is LESS than California?

Things need to be done to make guns safer. Harder to get maybe. But a complete ban will work about as well as the prohibition did (it didnt work at all by the way).

This isn't freedom's last hurrah, get your fucking priorities straight. This nation won't collapse on itself simply because a fraction of the population have their assault weapons and military grade equipment taken away.

I'm all for the 2nd Amendment, but it was written in the context of letting the people protect themselves from an excessive or totalitarian government. What's happening now is the modification of gun control laws in reaction to a massacre in a fucking elementary school. If you look at that, paired with the countless other mass shootings, and do not GENUINELY think that at least something needs to be done, then I don't know what's going on in your head.

All in all, I respect your opinion - after all it is the diversity of opinion that helps a true democracy flourish - but something needs to be done. If the regulations passed in '34 and '89 were truly effective by today's standards, we would not be seeing the sort of unfathomable and shockingly common violence there is today in the country.

meh
"The AR-15 can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute depending on the skill of the operator" => 1 round per second...

no you can fire much faster than this with this kind of weapon pulling a trigger isn't really hard, after this i stopped reading,

I've got a Bushmaster XM-15 E2S with a bump fire stock that enables up to 1,100 rounds per minute. The exact same one that's in this vid. www.youtube.com/watch?v=0B7tzaYgp5g

With any kind of accuracy?

Good luck.

same kind of accuracy than when you're using a fully automatic weapon. of course you have a much lower rate of fire than an automatic weapon, but much higher than 45 and 60 rounds per minute

The difference is, you can hold the grip easier and tighter using a fully automatic weapon. The aim is also very sensitive and spamming the trigger makes it very difficult to hold the weapon absolutely still.

I've always known this distinction between different firearms and the law against automatic weapons and not semi-automatic weapons, but this presentation brings so much new knowledge so definite love!

thanks, ive been using this to inform people of whats really being debated.

Did someone say Railway Gun?

Does that turret rotate? If not, would that mean you'd have to build the track to face your target?

Its firing range was enormous.

I guessed that, but it's still useless if you don't build the track pointing at the enemy.

And if its firing range is so long, why put it on rails? Surely moving it a few dozen kilometers is like a drip in the ocean?

The top platform and turret could rotate.
Albeit, not very quickly, but still.

In the game it can.
Lost Planet 2.

I don't think quick reactions are the prize point of a gun that size.

I like it anyhow.

Yeah, pretty much anything that couldn't move was dead as soon as it looked at it.

It couldnt fire from german to england for example. but it could fire across the english channel, and etc.

Tbh it is cool just for sheer size, but pointless really.

This is actually the Railway Gun from Lost Planet 2...

You use it to fight one of those giant Sand Worm monsters from Dune.
Going full speed.

goddammit carlos i know its you!