Gun Laws

really? So no home has ever been robbed by multiple home invaders?

I woman in Atlanta recently shot a home invader 6 times with a pistol. He got up an walked away. What if there were multiple attackers? What if he still came at her? He would have killed her and her children because she had a low capacity gun with a samll amount of bullets. And yet we just passed a bunch of laws today that would have made her a criminal for having anything more than 7 bullets in it. That doesn't make sense to me.

oggy420 wrote:

really? So no home has ever been robbed by multiple home invaders?

I woman in Atlanta recently shot a home invader 6 times with a pistol. He got up an walked away. What if there were multiple attackers? What if he still came at her? He would have killed her and her children because she had a low capacity gun with a samll amount of bullets. And yet we just passed a bunch of laws today that would have made her a criminal for having anything more than 7 bullets in it. That doesn't make sense to me.

Wouldn't you be more successful with a shotgun? Give that bitch a shotgun and see who walks away and who doesn't. If you are robbed by multiple fuckers and they all have guns you are likely dead anyways. So what the AR allows you to take 2 more with you then you would have? But a shotgun would be even more productive. Unless you are at distance.
If you are that scared then have a shotgun and a hand gun. Go ahead and get you a Rambo knife for when you run out of bullets as well. You need an AR? Really? Cause 6 gunman might randomly try to rob you and an AR would save your life? 6 fuckers with guns come after you, you are likely dead unless you are a trained badass and go all Jason Bourne on them. You so crazy my man.

So no one ever answered. After all these gun control laws and executive orders are passed, what happens when another mass shooting happens?

Say it's with a hand-gun. What then?

oggy420 wrote:

So no one ever answered. After all these gun control laws and executive orders are passed, what happens when another mass shooting happens?

Say it's with a hand-gun. What then?

What do you suggest? Do nothing at all, don't even attempt to get even 1 gun off the street that wouldn't have been there otherwise? You suggest we just give everyone guns and see who survieves then? How can you think down on people that are doing what they can to make any kind of change possible? You suggest everyone does nothing? Then what do you suggest we do after the next shooting? Make guns easier to get? Make clips larger? Let's develop larger bullets how about that? What? What do you suggest?

OU wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

really? So no home has ever been robbed by multiple home invaders?

I woman in Atlanta recently shot a home invader 6 times with a pistol. He got up an walked away. What if there were multiple attackers? What if he still came at her? He would have killed her and her children because she had a low capacity gun with a samll amount of bullets. And yet we just passed a bunch of laws today that would have made her a criminal for having anything more than 7 bullets in it. That doesn't make sense to me.

Wouldn't you be more successful with a shotgun? Give that bitch a shotgun and see who walks away and who doesn't. If you are robbed by multiple fuckers and they all have guns you are likely dead anyways. So what the AR allows you to take 2 more with you then you would have? But a shotgun would be even more productive. Unless you are at distance.
If you are that scared then have a shotgun and a hand gun. Go ahead and get you a Rambo knife for when you run out of bullets as well. You need an AR? Really? Cause 6 gunman might randomly try to rob you and an AR would save your life? 6 fuckers with guns come after you, you are likely dead unless you are a trained badass and go all Jason Bourne on them. You so crazy my man.

ar-15 is about as good as it gets when it comes to home defense. Shotgun might be better in close quarters, but reloading a shotgun can be a process.
And yea, if a bunch of armed thugs are trying to break in to my house i would feel much safer knowing i have a weapon that is the most sufficent way to defend myself. Thats just crazy ol me though.

oggy420 wrote:

OU wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

really? So no home has ever been robbed by multiple home invaders?

I woman in Atlanta recently shot a home invader 6 times with a pistol. He got up an walked away. What if there were multiple attackers? What if he still came at her? He would have killed her and her children because she had a low capacity gun with a samll amount of bullets. And yet we just passed a bunch of laws today that would have made her a criminal for having anything more than 7 bullets in it. That doesn't make sense to me.

Wouldn't you be more successful with a shotgun? Give that bitch a shotgun and see who walks away and who doesn't. If you are robbed by multiple fuckers and they all have guns you are likely dead anyways. So what the AR allows you to take 2 more with you then you would have? But a shotgun would be even more productive. Unless you are at distance.
If you are that scared then have a shotgun and a hand gun. Go ahead and get you a Rambo knife for when you run out of bullets as well. You need an AR? Really? Cause 6 gunman might randomly try to rob you and an AR would save your life? 6 fuckers with guns come after you, you are likely dead unless you are a trained badass and go all Jason Bourne on them. You so crazy my man.

ar-15 is about as good as it gets when it comes to home defense. Shotgun might be better in close quarters, but reloading a shotgun can be a process.
And yea, if a bunch of armed thugs are trying to break in to my house i would feel much safer knowing i have a weapon that is the most sufficent way to defend myself. Thats just crazy ol me though.

And a shotgun and pistol is not a sufficient way to defend yourself? That's fucking stupid. You feel unsafe without your high powered rifel. Most home invasions are close quarters, hell ALL home invasions are close quarters. So how is a shotgun not more productive? You can get a shotgun that allows you to load 4 shots at once. Doesn't take long to pump that bitch after you fire.
Not only are you incorrect about what is more sufficient/efficient you are being over dramatic about what it takes to make you feel safe. You need 100 bullets and an extended clip to feel secure? You can't feel save with a .45 and a double barrel? I suggest you move to Switzerland if you're that scared and that unproductive with a fire arm. You acting like what I'm listing is not sufficient enough is just insane. Let's go into a house and give you an AR and me a shotgun and see who walks out that bitch.

OU wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

So no one ever answered. After all these gun control laws and executive orders are passed, what happens when another mass shooting happens?

Say it's with a hand-gun. What then?

What do you suggest? Do nothing at all, don't even attempt to get even 1 gun off the street that wouldn't have been there otherwise? You suggest we just give everyone guns and see who survieves then? How can you think down on people that are doing what they can to make any kind of change possible? You suggest everyone does nothing? Then what do you suggest we do after the next shooting? Make guns easier to get? Make clips larger? Let's develop larger bullets how about that? What? What do you suggest?

come on man. I've said what i suggest multiple times. Stricter background checks. Close the gun show loop holes. Beyond that i don't think further gun control will accomplish anything other than a spike in violent crime levels.

Making guns not a taboo subject is a start. Obviously we have a sick society that produces a lot of violent people. Rather than just trying to cover the wounds with a band-aid, why is it so unimaginable that me might start to actually address the underlying issues of violence?

One last point. Do you know what a more common trend in mass shootings is, even greater than the trend of using ar-15's?
Almost all of them are on prescribed psycotropic drugs. Drugs that have listed side-effects of suicide and violence against others.
Clearly has nothing to do with any of this though.

oggy420 wrote:

OU wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

So no one ever answered. After all these gun control laws and executive orders are passed, what happens when another mass shooting happens?

Say it's with a hand-gun. What then?

What do you suggest? Do nothing at all, don't even attempt to get even 1 gun off the street that wouldn't have been there otherwise? You suggest we just give everyone guns and see who survieves then? How can you think down on people that are doing what they can to make any kind of change possible? You suggest everyone does nothing? Then what do you suggest we do after the next shooting? Make guns easier to get? Make clips larger? Let's develop larger bullets how about that? What? What do you suggest?

come on man. I've said what i suggest multiple times. Stricter background checks. Close the gun show loop holes. Beyond that i don't think further gun control will accomplish anything other than a spike in violent crime levels.

Making guns not a taboo subject is a start. Obviously we have a sick society that produces a lot of violent people. Rather than just trying to cover the wounds with a band-aid, why is it so unimaginable that me might start to actually address the underlying issues of violence?

One last point. Do you know what a more common trend in mass shootings is, even greater than the trend of using ar-15's?
Almost all of them are on prescribed psycotropic drugs. Drugs that have listed side-effects of suicide and violence against others.
Clearly has nothing to do with any of this though.

I have never seen anyone, anywhere suggest that there aren't a variety of other factors when it comes to all shootings. I haven't seen anyone say that gun control alone will magically bring down gun crimes. But could it be one factor? Obviously drug use is a major factor when it comes to a variety of crimes. So does mental health. Could that be a bigger factor? I think it probably is. But that doesn't mean gun control can be a part of the equation. I'm not against guns I just think it's incredibly moronic to think you need a high powered semi-auto rifle to protect yourself. It's not like you won't still have a wide variety of gun options to defend yourself. Why does it mean it will snowball like you are so afraid it will? Making it more difficult to own a semi-auto does not mean that one day they will come for your pistol. It's not like there isn't a few steps between where that can be stopped. I just don't get it at all. You could still be armed without a riffle.

Making big guns illegal isn't going to make them go away. It's just going to take them away from the more responsible gun owners. I've probably said this 3x in this thread already.

Mass shootings are rare and with a variety if guns. No reason to take away just ARs. If you want to fix gun violence which us largely due to crime, we need to change our welfare state culture. We need to jobs and not handouts. How many people with a steady job rob a bank or break into someone's house?

Farmer1906 wrote:

Making big guns illegal isn't going to make them go away. It's just going to take them away from the more responsible gun owners. I've probably said this 3x in this thread already.

Mass shootings are rare and with a variety if guns. No reason to take away just ARs. If you want to fix gun violence which us largely due to crime, we need to change our welfare state culture. We need to jobs and not handouts. How many people with a steady job rob a bank or break into someone's house?

People who don't want jobs won't work no matter how easy it is to get them. Social misfits and psychos will still want to kill people. What about focusing on mental health?

OU wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

OU wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

really? So no home has ever been robbed by multiple home invaders?

I woman in Atlanta recently shot a home invader 6 times with a pistol. He got up an walked away. What if there were multiple attackers? What if he still came at her? He would have killed her and her children because she had a low capacity gun with a samll amount of bullets. And yet we just passed a bunch of laws today that would have made her a criminal for having anything more than 7 bullets in it. That doesn't make sense to me.

Wouldn't you be more successful with a shotgun? Give that bitch a shotgun and see who walks away and who doesn't. If you are robbed by multiple fuckers and they all have guns you are likely dead anyways. So what the AR allows you to take 2 more with you then you would have? But a shotgun would be even more productive. Unless you are at distance.
If you are that scared then have a shotgun and a hand gun. Go ahead and get you a Rambo knife for when you run out of bullets as well. You need an AR? Really? Cause 6 gunman might randomly try to rob you and an AR would save your life? 6 fuckers with guns come after you, you are likely dead unless you are a trained badass and go all Jason Bourne on them. You so crazy my man.

ar-15 is about as good as it gets when it comes to home defense. Shotgun might be better in close quarters, but reloading a shotgun can be a process.
And yea, if a bunch of armed thugs are trying to break in to my house i would feel much safer knowing i have a weapon that is the most sufficent way to defend myself. Thats just crazy ol me though.

And a shotgun and pistol is not a sufficient way to defend yourself? That's fucking stupid. You feel unsafe without your high powered rifel. Most home invasions are close quarters, hell ALL home invasions are close quarters. So how is a shotgun not more productive? You can get a shotgun that allows you to load 4 shots at once. Doesn't take long to pump that bitch after you fire.
Not only are you incorrect about what is more sufficient/efficient you are being over dramatic about what it takes to make you feel safe. You need 100 bullets and an extended clip to feel secure? You can't feel save with a .45 and a double barrel? I suggest you move to Switzerland if you're that scared and that unproductive with a fire arm. You acting like what I'm listing is not sufficient enough is just insane. Let's go into a house and give you an AR and me a shotgun and see who walks out that bitch.

I didn't say that. I'd obviously rather have a hand-gun or shotgun as opposed to no gun at all.
also you are putting words in my mouth. When did i say that i need 100 bullets and an extended clip? I said i was against a federal 7 round clip limit. Most guns out there now are at least 8 round clips. That makes anyone who uses their weapon with an old 8 round clip a criminal, even if used in self defense.
Do you think people who are responsible gun owners, who obey the law and pay their taxes, should have their right to defend themselves taken away because a mentally damaged person comitted a crime with a gun?
It is literally as stupid as punishing all recreational pot users for one person doing something incredibly stupid while they were high. It's the same logic. it's like saying... hey drunk driving is a really big problem. So let's make it illegal for sober people to buy cars. That will solve the problem.

Making it harder for law-abding citizens to become armed doesn't make it harder for criminals to get armed. It just makes it easier for criminals to get away with crime and victimize more people.

I don't understand your side of the argument in the least. Butt hurt over dramatic nancy boys that need an AR to feel safe don't concern me in the least. I don't give a shit how much taxes they pay. I suggest you build a crocodile infested moat around your house if you are that scared. Maybe lay out a few land mines.
Fuck anyone that thinks they need an AR for protection. I suggest we check them for mental stability as well. Sounds like the kind of fuckers that will be taking part in these mass shootings. Paranoid fucks with little man syndrome.

Fuck this is a looooooooooooong day.

OU wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

So no one ever answered. After all these gun control laws and executive orders are passed, what happens when another mass shooting happens?

Say it's with a hand-gun. What then?

What do you suggest? Do nothing at all, don't even attempt to get even 1 gun off the street that wouldn't have been there otherwise? You suggest we just give everyone guns and see who survieves then? How can you think down on people that are doing what they can to make any kind of change possible? You suggest everyone does nothing? Then what do you suggest we do after the next shooting? Make guns easier to get? Make clips larger? Let's develop larger bullets how about that? What? What do you suggest?

also you never answered the question. What if the mext mass shooting is with a hand-gun or shotgun? This isn't a gotchya question. This is me honestly asking you
Do you think they will stop at "assault rifles"?

Because i don't. And that why im on defense more than anything. Onece we let them take an inch, you know they will try to take a mile. Thats how this works.

Personally i don't own an ar-15. i have a simple .22 rifle usually meant for small game hunting. I wish i could get an ar but they are out of my price range right now. Oh yea they are also illegal now where i live... so there is that.

oggy420 wrote:

obviously if you disagree with any of these executive orders you don't care about the children....





no shame

Do you welcome any of those potential executive orders or does it simply being related to efforts to curb violence from firearms trigger an automatic no across the board?

ahh yes. Anyone who owns a semi-auto rifle is now a paranoic fuck nancy boy who are gonna shoot everyone up.
There's that logical debate i was hoping for.

OU wrote:

I don't understand your side of the argument in the least. Butt hurt over dramatic nancy boys that need an AR to feel safe don't concern me in the least. I don't give a shit how much taxes they pay. I suggest you build a crocodile infested moat around your house if you are that scared. Maybe lay out a few land mines.
Fuck anyone that thinks they need an AR for protection. I suggest we check them for mental stability as well. Sounds like the kind of fuckers that will be taking part in these mass shootings. Paranoid fucks with little man syndrome.

Why does it have to be for protection? Why can't it be got hunting hogs and sport shooting?

Ban them and people who want them will get them and kill people. Law abiding citizens just get screwed and lose more freedom.

oggy420 wrote:

OU wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

So no one ever answered. After all these gun control laws and executive orders are passed, what happens when another mass shooting happens?

Say it's with a hand-gun. What then?

What do you suggest? Do nothing at all, don't even attempt to get even 1 gun off the street that wouldn't have been there otherwise? You suggest we just give everyone guns and see who survieves then? How can you think down on people that are doing what they can to make any kind of change possible? You suggest everyone does nothing? Then what do you suggest we do after the next shooting? Make guns easier to get? Make clips larger? Let's develop larger bullets how about that? What? What do you suggest?

also you never answered the question. What if the mext mass shooting is with a hand-gun or shotgun? This isn't a gotchya question. This is me honestly asking you
Do you think they will stop at "assault rifles"?

Because i don't. And that why im on defense more than anything. Onece we let them take an inch, you know they will try to take a mile. Thats how this works.

Personally i don't own an ar-15. i have a simple .22 rifle usually meant for small game hunting. I wish i could get an ar but they are out of my price range right now. Oh yea they are also illegal now where i live... so there is that.

Absolutely I think they can stop at rifles. I don't think they have to go after every weapon ever used to kill an innocent person. But odds are less people will be injured/killed by a crazy fuck with a hand gun then a rifle. I also don't get how making guns harder to get won't translate to the streets? The more expensive and difficult it is to get the less people that will people that will have them, the less people that will sell them illegally on the streets.

Personally, I do feel I have the undeniable right to bare arms in the form of a nuclear weapon because I do believe Extra Terrestrial beings will engage me in warfare at some point, maybe. I believe this so who is anyone to deny me my right? I would be justified in ending one's life if they chose to impede.

oggy420 wrote:

ahh yes. Anyone who owns a semi-auto rifle is now a paranoic fuck nancy boy who are gonna shoot everyone up.
There's that logical debate i was hoping for.

Oh and saying you don't feel you have sufficient enough protection without a semi-auto is logical argument? Give me a break. You want to go all crazy extreme, that's what you get.

And this is the point I leave this thread to the idiots who can't debate and go to name calling and none sense.

GDPofDRC wrote:

Personally, I do feel I have the undeniable right to bare arms in the form of a nuclear weapon because I do believe Extra Terrestrial beings will engage me in warfare at some point, maybe. I believe this so who is anyone to deny me my right? I would be justified in ending one's life if they chose to impede.

I'm all for the extermination of all man kind. We aren't worthy of this life.

GDPofDRC wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

obviously if you disagree with any of these executive orders you don't care about the children....





no shame

Do you welcome any of those potential executive orders or does it simply being related to efforts to curb violence from firearms trigger an automatic no across the board?

jesus christ does anyone actually read anymore?
First of all he shouldn't have done it through executive order. If this is something the people want, let the representitives pass it in the house and senate.
For about the 10th time in this thread

i am for stricter background checks. This includes a more comprehensive background check than the current fbi one.
i am for closing gun-show loopholes.
i agree that anyone who buys a gun should go through a tough mental health check as well.

That doesn't equal "doing nothing" which everyone seems to think is what i am saying.

As for the rest , i hope i have made how i feel about banning any type of firearm very clear by now.

Farmer1906 wrote:

And this is the point I leave this thread to the idiots who can't debate and go to name calling and none sense.

Never seen a sensible debate in favor of semi autos for home protection.

If the Gnomes of Zurich team up with the Aliens, I will also be forced to bare a Sun Crusher and possibly defend my home by using it on the Sun. I believe I have the right to do so because I believe I am correct by interpreting the dynamics of the world in the 1700's as a mirror reflection of how things work today, I just right, therefore those who don't agree forfeit their right to live at my discretion.