The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on October 04, 2017, 09:50:32 PM
-
Comatose Sphagetti (338 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029674409
Do you support banning semi-autos? Yes or no.
My answer; yes.
Single-shot everything only.
The rest? Melt 'em.
:thatsright:
Please run on that in 2018.
greeny2323 (261 posts)
2. Citizens should not be allowed to own guns
Except in highly-regulated circumstances where protection from wildlife, etc. might be needed. The weapons allowed would be extremely limited.
Jim Beard (2,400 posts)
9. yes
Of my 9 "Long Guns" 2 shotguns are semi automatic and one .22 rifle is semi automatic. The rest are mostly lever action which is what I prefer. I don't have the kick-back with the lever action.
:thatsright: Having a lever action does not effect the recoil of the weapon, DUmbass.
bushalert (177 posts)
12. YES. No need for semis in a civilized society.
Star Member uponit7771 (43,448 posts)
15. YES !!! - The ones designed to kill massive amounts of humans in a short time
Star Member milestogo (3,533 posts)
23. I support banning all guns not belonging to law enforcement,
reclaiming them from their owners, and crushing them to bits.
ClarendonDem (13 posts)
59. Australia's buyback program resulted in about 660,000 guns
Being turned in. There are something like 300,000,000 guns in public hands in the US. Some would get turned in, but not many, and most that were would likely be junk. Aren't there example from city buyback programs in the US that resulted in just a bunch of junk guns being turned in?
Fred Sanders (19,746 posts)
68. Apparently most were buried in "the Outback". Which is everywhere. LOL.
Every NRA talking point makes me laugh!
Facts you don't like = NRA TALKING POINTS11!!!
Star Member PoindexterOglethorpe (3,207 posts)
30. Everyone who opposes the ban is essentially saying,
it's perfectly okay for mass shootings to occur in this country.
I just wish that once someone who is quite fine with all of these weapons would somehow be impacted by one of these mass murders. And if you then say, "I'm fine that my (wife, brother, mother, son) was murdered. It's a small price to pay so that anyone at all can own a gun, including semi-automatic weapons," I'll then suggested you are as psychopathic as the murderers themselves.
No. No semi-automatic. Licensing and training for all gun owners. Mandatory insurance. Mandatory reporting of theft, and holding liable those whose guns were stolen if those guns were later used to kill someone. Limits on how many guns anyone can own. Background checks. Real background checks that exclude people who have no business owning guns. Major limits on ammunition.
And STOP ****ing saying it can't be done. It can be if we want to.
Meanwhile, men in Congress are restricting women's Constitutional right to control their own bodies. Because, OMG! What if some woman actually enjoys sex! Punish her!
:thatsright:
Star Member Crunchy Frog (19,346 posts)
60. Sad fact is that our society basically is okay with these mass killings
In spite of the hypocritical hand wringing that goes on every time it happens.
It's not just an NRA or GOP thing either, as a perusal of DU right now will clearly demonstrate.
I'm not even interested in fighting it anymore, or feeling bad when the consequences of our national choices play themselves out.
At this point my only concern is keeping myself and family out of the line of fire.
I would quite happily move to a civilized country if it were feasible.
Star Member Hoyt (31,167 posts)
54. More inclined to support gun and ammo limits; tough restrictions on public toting; background checks
on all transfers; ban on high cap mags, bump stocks, certain types of ammo; new taxes on semi-autos and ammo; use of scanners and perhaps chips for detection of toters; licensing; loss of privilege if convicted of domestic violence; severe penalties for violating laws; violates guns will be destroyed, not resold; and a few others.
I would prefer total ban, but restrictions on number of guns --particularly semi-autos including pistols --will cool down gun market.
Star Member Doreen (4,888 posts)
61. Yes
If we have to have guns then nothing more than guns that have six bullets or single shooters. None of these damn guns with clips and 20 rapid shoot bullets. Hunting rifles and if home protection you do not need 20 bullets. If you can not shoot someone in six shots you should not have a gun in the first ****ing place because you obviously have no clue how to actually shoot one. Classes and I mean a lot that covers everything I mean EVERYTHING to do with guns and you MUST pass with 100% so you better actually study and practice. Oh, until you get your license you must only be with someone who is a qualified licensed teacher for gun use and keep your gun in a secure gun range where you have your classes. Don't allow people to drive without licenses so the same should be with a guns.
Rapid shoot bullets? :o
Star Member leanforward (463 posts) <---- has Bronze Star as icon... probably never served...
73. Yes
My position is, revolver, lever action, bolt action, or pump action. That's what you would need to protect your home.
I have not heard that type of gun fire I heard on the news, since RVN.
Some on this thread suggest rules about this and that. My approach is to melt'em down.
My thoughts of protection go to our (my) LEO's, and first responders. Then the domestic violence victims for any type of firearm.
With that said, impeach pRezident dRumpf for treason. He's in bed with the russians.
Keep in mind the cold war. From the end of WW II through the end of the cold war in 1989, the paruskies maintained the iron curtain. How may US troops died? How many germans died trying to cross into West Berlin, after 1961? Putin was working through the ranks of the KGB in those years.
-
greeny2323 (261 posts)
2. Citizens should not be allowed to own guns
Except in highly-regulated circumstances where protection from wildlife, etc. might be needed. The weapons allowed would be extremely limited.
My definition of wildlife may be a bit broader than his
-
greeny2323 (261 posts)
2. Citizens should not be allowed to own guns
Except in highly-regulated circumstances where protection from wildlife, etc. might be needed. The weapons allowed would be extremely limited.
Does that include the ferals clustered in large cities?
"Can I get me a huntin license here"? John I was in Vietnam Kerry
-
Hey DUmmies....
Come.Take.Them.
-
...
Jim Beard (2,400 posts)
9. yes
Of my 9 "Long Guns" 2 shotguns are semi automatic and one .22 rifle is semi automatic. The rest are mostly lever action which is what I prefer. I don't have the kick-back with the lever action.
:thatsright: Having a lever action does not effect the recoil of the weapon, DUmbass.
...
:rotf: Yeah, he did kind of expose himself as a poser. But since few on DU know enough of guns to call him out ...
-
...
Star Member Doreen (4,888 posts)
61. Yes
If we have to have guns then nothing more than guns that have six bullets or single shooters. None of these damn guns with clips and 20 rapid shoot bullets. Hunting rifles and if home protection you do not need 20 bullets. If you can not shoot someone in six shots you should not have a gun in the first ****ing place because you obviously have no clue how to actually shoot one. ...
Rapid shoot bullets? :o
IKR? I think it might be a phrase she heard on one of the MSM "news" networks or saw one of their "reporters" use on Twitter. It's stupidity so glaring it obscures the garden variety ignorance she displayed. Not to mention her ignorance of tense situation where the people trying to kill you are moving and partially blocked by objects in the room or area. Not to mention her ignorance of the fact that hitting an attacker does not necessarily stop or turn them away.
-
Their idea of gun control is confiscation and putting all gun owners in reeducation camps. :mental: :bird:
The 2nd amendment was written to protect us from THEM!!
-
Star Member PoindexterOglethorpe (3,207 posts)
30. Everyone who opposes the ban is essentially saying,
it's perfectly okay for mass shootings to occur in this country.
Everyone who supports people who own and operate personal vehicles is essentially saying.
it's perfectly okay for mass deaths from drunk driving to occur in this country.
https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
In 2015, 10,265 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (29%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States.
Private vehicle ownership carnage must stop and vehicles seized!
-
Their idea of gun control is confiscation and putting all gun owners in reeducation camps. :mental: :bird:
The 2nd amendment was written to protect us from THEM!!
The 2nd will come into play likely sooner rather than later, I am now convinced.
-
Star Member milestogo (3,533 posts)
23. I support banning all guns not belonging to law enforcement,
reclaiming them from their owners, and crushing them to bits.
These same DUmmies cheered for the NFL idiots protesting police brutality. Now they want the cops to have all the guns. :rofl:
-
doc03 (19,496 posts)
88. No, limit magazine capacity, ban bump stocks and require
a background check on (ALL) gun sales or trades.
Stupid ass. That is already in place.
-
Jim Beard (2,400 posts)
9. yes
Of my 9 "Long Guns" 2 shotguns are semi automatic and one .22 rifle is semi automatic. The rest are mostly lever action which is what I prefer. I don't have the kick-back with the lever action.
This dude has never watched 'The Rifleman' I'm guessing. LOL He could crank out some rounds from the hip and never miss.
Of course, if you listen to all the DUmmie non shooters/firearm owners, there is absolutely no skill involved in hitting what you're aiming at. They've all been to a range once and shot expert, so there was no sense in going back. Using their logic, we can ALL shoot like the Rifleman!
:lmao:
KC
-
Coming at this from another direction, semi-automatic guns have been around for over 130 years, and widely available to civilians in the US for well over a century. But as a whole, mass shootings (per the FBI, 4 or more people murdered by the same shooter) have been very uncommon until the last decade or two. What changed to make mass shootings less uncommon?
-
ecstatic (22,325 posts)
118. Is the glock semi auto? And how easy is it to shoot with
other types? One day I was at the gun shop with a friend and decided to see what the home defense shot gun was like. Way too heavy and impractical
:lmao: Shotgun way too heavy and impractical ???? Dumb DUmmy
-
:lmao: Shotgun way too heavy and impractical ???? Dumb DUmmy
The only DUmmie I know that could short cycle a pump shotgun. :thatsright:
-
I am ready to have a discussion about guns when:
there are limits on abortion.
Voter roles are purged of the dead and non citizens
blm is shut down and those who participated in violence are prosecuted
antifa is shut down and members are prosecuted.
Trans genders are seen as mentally ill and given treatment. not more rights.
Hilliary clinton, eric holder, lois lerner and loretta lynch are prosecuted.
take care of that then come talk to me :loser: :loser:
-
Right off the bat, didn't the video of the shooting indicate that the shooter was, for at least part of the shooting, using a fully- automatic (aka illegal) gun, not a semi- auto?
However, the award for biggest douche on this thread has to go to this guy:
"Star Member PoindexterOglethorpe (3,207 posts)
30. Everyone who opposes the ban is essentially saying,
it's perfectly okay for mass shootings to occur in this country.
I just wish that once someone who is quite fine with all of these weapons would somehow be impacted by one of these mass murders. And if you then say, "I'm fine that my (wife, brother, mother, son) was murdered. It's a small price to pay so that anyone at all can own a gun, including semi-automatic weapons," I'll then suggested you are as psychopathic as the murderers themselves."
Liberals are always the best at straw- men aren't they?
I of course am against mass shootings.
The thing is, though, liberal gun laws have done nothing to prevent them, as in pretty much all of the recent mass shootings we've gone through, including this one, the shooter(s) largely if not exclusively relied on guns that were illegally owned to begin with (i.e. guns that were stolen, or obtained in some sort of ! Also, the majority of mass shootings occurred in areas designated "Gun Free Zones" (i.e. The Pulse Nightclub, the various school shootings, etc.), another liberal gun- control attempt that ultimately has proven useless at doing anything but assure shooters that they won't run into anybody in those environments capable of firing back at them. Since shooters clearly don't care about breaking gun laws already on the books, they won't care about breaking more gun laws.
As for the heartless and extra- douchey assertions made in the second paragraph, while I admittedly have not lost anyone in a mass shooting, that's not to say I've never lost a loved one to gun violence. Eleven years ago, an old friend of mine from youth group was shot dead in a botched carjacking before he could even graduate high school, by some thug who wanted his car and the $16.00 in his wallet and didn't want to leave any witnesses. Fortunately, the thug in question was quickly caught, entered a plea bargain to keep his sorry butt off death row, and got two life sentences for murder and grand theft auto plus an additional eight years for charges basically centering around the fact that he was a minor who used a gun in a crime. Hopefully by now he's already caught herpes from being raped by a cellmate. In this murder, too, the gun in question was illegally owned; The thug stole it from a relative of his who was a retired cop.
I have mourned the loss of my friend, but know that more gun laws would not have prevented his murder.
If you want to take about serious ways to prevent future mass shootings, I feel a MUCH more effective way would be a nationwide campaign educating the public on the "Warning signs" a person may be at risk of committing an act of violence, and encouraging people to act if they see someone demonstrating most of those signs. In nearly all of the recent mass shootings, with the exception of the Vegas shooting, the shooter was someone who was clearly mentally disturbed and demonstrating those signs, the shooters' friends and family members KNEW they were dangerous, and yet they did nothing. In contrast, at least one planned shooting (A plan by someone to launch an "Aurora movie theater"- esque shooting at the midnight premiere of 'The Twilight Sage: Breaking Dawn, Part 2') was thwarted because the would- be shooter's loved ones noticed him acting suspiciously, looked into it, discovered what he was planning, and told the cops about it.
This DUmmy gains extra douche- points for this:
"Mandatory reporting of theft, and holding liable those whose guns were stolen if those guns were later used to kill someone."
I don't have much of a problem with the first of those ideas, but the second one sounds really unfair and oppressive. If someone's gun was stolen (Especially if he had used reasonable precaution in storing it), he shouldn't be held responsible for what the thief or someone else then does with it.
-
Most of the mass shootings have one thing in common, the mental health of the shooter. If I am not mistaken this has been brought up on more than 1 occasion but the libs refuse to do anything to deal with the crazy people. it is a hot button issue with them, like abortion. :mental: :thatsright:
Until this is addressed we are at a standoff in trying to stop some of these shootings.
Another problem is reducing or plea bargaining sentences for gun offenders. Draconian mandatory sentences have been put in place, be it seem the charges are lowered because we have to many minorities in jail.
-
The only DUmmie I know that could short cycle a pump shotgun. :thatsright:
DUmmies be sooo DUmb, they can't even cycle a semi-auto. :whistling:
-
Response to Comatose Sphagetti (Original post)Wed Oct 4, 2017, 08:39 PM
greeny2323 (276 posts)
2. Citizens should not be allowed to own guns
Except in highly-regulated circumstances where protection from wildlife, etc. might be needed. The weapons allowed would be extremely limited.
If they aren't allowed to own guns then they aren't citizens anymore, they are subjects.
Response to Comatose Sphagetti (Original post)Wed Oct 4, 2017, 09:05 PM
Star Member milestogo (3,548 posts)
23. I support banning all guns not belonging to law enforcement,
reclaiming them from their owners, and crushing them to bits.
Since the leftists like to talk about who needs guns, maybe one of them will come over here and explain why law enforcement needs guns in an otherwise gun free society.
-
DUmmies, if you want to attempt this, I have one statement for you.
Come and get them. :whistling:
I guarantee that it will not progress--or end--the way that you think it will.
-
greeny2323 (276 posts)
2. Citizens should not be allowed to own guns
Except in highly-regulated circumstances where protection from wildlife, etc. might be needed. ...
Does that include bipedal "wildlife"?
-
:thatsright: Having a lever action does not effect the recoil of the weapon, DUmbass.
...
:rotf: Yeah, he did kind of expose himself as a poser. But since few on DU know enough of guns to call him out ...
@SVPete
The FACT is that lever-action guns have MORE felt recoil than any other design due to the buttstock design and the fact they are generally lighter than other designs.
-
Their idea of gun control is confiscation and putting all gun owners in reeducation camps. :mental: :bird:
The 2nd amendment was written to protect us from THEM!!
:cheersmate:
-
These same DUmmies cheered for the NFL idiots protesting police brutality. Now they want the cops to have all the guns. :rofl:
@thundley4
Being a leftist means you are emotional and clueless,and never allow facts or logic to interfere with your decision-making.
And come the revolution,they will be the first ones led to the gulag because even the fascist left leadership understands that cretins are useless for anything other than plant food.
-
If they aren't allowed to own guns then they aren't citizens anymore, they are subjects.
Since the leftists like to talk about who needs guns, maybe one of them will come over here and explain why law enforcement needs guns in an otherwise gun free society.
If a mole happened to mention that on DU or start a thread in DU jr. :whistling:
That would be most intertaining to say the least.
I'd love to see/hear their reasoning.
Done deal. :-)
-
These same DUmmies cheered for the NFL idiots protesting police brutality. Now they want the cops to have all the guns. :rofl:
Not only that but the DUmbasses call President Trump Hitler and dictator but want to take away the American citizen's right to protect themselves by repealing the 2nd Amendment and confiscating every privately owned firearm in the country.
-
If a mole happened to mention that on DU or start a thread in DU jr. :whistling:
That would be most intertaining to say the least.
I'd love to see/hear their reasoning.
Done deal. :-)
Skul
Won't work. You are not taking into consideration the nature of the typical "cog in the machine". They will say that armed cops represent the collective power of the people over the anarchists that want disorder. The gun will be a welcome symbol and reminder of the authority of the state,comrade!
-
Everyone who supports people who own and operate personal vehicles is essentially saying.
it's perfectly okay for mass deaths from drunk driving to occur in this country.
Private vehicle ownership carnage must stop and vehicles seized!
Mass shooting, firearm, and drunk driving deaths are peanuts compared to Planned Parenthood's abortion mills.
Nobody sheds any tears for the 900,000 potential babies killed EVERY YEAR!!!
-
Oops, upon returning to the post I made in this thread, I realize I failed to complete one of my sentences! My bad.
It read as "The thing is, though, liberal gun laws have done nothing to prevent them, as in pretty much all of the recent mass shootings we've gone through, including this one, the shooter(s) largely if not exclusively relied on guns that were illegally owned to begin with (i.e. guns that were stolen, or obtained in some sort of !"
The part in parentheses was meant to say "(i.e. guns that were stolen, or obtained in some sort of illicit trade, such as a drug dealer being given a gun as payment for drugs)".
Again, my bad. When I wrote that post, I was with my g/f, and she can be VERY good at diverting my attention from what I was typing!
-
Oops, upon returning to the post I made in this thread, I realize I failed to complete one of my sentences! My bad.
It read as "The thing is, though, liberal gun laws have done nothing to prevent them, as in pretty much all of the recent mass shootings we've gone through, including this one, the shooter(s) largely if not exclusively relied on guns that were illegally owned to begin with (i.e. guns that were stolen, or obtained in some sort of !"
The part in parentheses was meant to say "(i.e. guns that were stolen, or obtained in some sort of illicit trade, such as a drug dealer being given a gun as payment for drugs)".
Again, my bad. When I wrote that post, I was with my g/f, and she can be VERY good at diverting my attention from what I was typing!
A good g/f will do that...
-
Comatose Sphagetti (338 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029674409
Do you support banning semi-autos? Yes or no.
My answer; yes.
Single-shot everything only.
The rest? Melt 'em.
Star Member milestogo (3,533 posts)
23. I support banning all guns not belonging to law enforcement,
reclaiming them from their owners, and crushing them to bits.
Every 4 years the democrat candidate for president assures us that they support the 2nd Amendment and any talk of a ban is crazy. A NRA talking point, no one wants to take your guns. Then after the election and for the next 36 months we get the steady stream of calls for some type of a ban (like those above).
Star Member Doreen (4,888 posts)
61. Yes
If we have to have guns then nothing more than guns that have six bullets or single shooters. None of these damn guns with clips and 20 rapid shoot bullets. Hunting rifles and if home protection you do not need 20 bullets. If you can not shoot someone in six shots you should not have a gun in the first ****ing place because you obviously have no clue how to actually shoot one. Classes and I mean a lot that covers everything I mean EVERYTHING to do with guns and you MUST pass with 100% so you better actually study and practice. Oh, until you get your license you must only be with someone who is a qualified licensed teacher for gun use and keep your gun in a secure gun range where you have your classes. Don't allow people to drive without licenses so the same should be with a guns.
Anyone think the DUmmies will ever realize these ideas are indistinguishable from the Jim Crow laws the democrat party passed after the Civil War? Me neither.
-
Mass shooting, firearm, and drunk driving deaths are peanuts compared to Planned Parenthood's abortion mills.
Nobody sheds any tears for the 900,000 potential babies killed EVERY YEAR!!!
As many DU members who support PP with $$ and in other ways "is essentially saying, it's perfectly okay for" the killing of 1 million babies a year "to occur in this country"!