Do you support ANY gun-control laws?

[TexasRifleman]

I love how Travis has no interest in addressing any of the points in the list (with bullet points, even!) that I posted earlier.

Not even once since he started the thread, in 21 pages, has he replied to any confrontation of "facts" he's posted.

Yet, more than one instance where he's called me out for not addressing directly things he's said (which I later did of course).

We're approaching thread lock in my opinion, no point in keeping that kind of circular thing going unless someone addresses the many direct questions that have been asked here.

 

[Justin]

The following chart which summarizes a meta-study of the effectiveness of gun control conducted by the Center for Disease Control may shed some light on the issue at hand.

Link to CDC website.

 

[slzy]

some leftist always asks "should we let people have hydrogen bombs,then?"

i am willinng to go that far myself,not supporting the right to bear hydrgen bombs.

 

[Justin]

Not even once since he started the thread, in 21 pages, has he replied to any confrontation of "facts" he's posted.

Indeed. He seems far more interested in self-inducing a case of the vapors by hectoring people into a "debate" over things that are completely outside of the realm of reality.

 

[Robert]

some leftist always asks "should we let people have hydrogen bombs,then?"

The argument they try to make with that is so far outside of reality that it is sad that they even bring it up. I will ask him again. Does he know anyone who could afford such a weapon? Has he ever seen a hydrogen bomb in person? Since by his reasoning they would seem to be easy to get if it were not for the laws "protecting" us from them.

 

[BhmBill]

No, because he seems far more interested in self-inducing a case of the vapors by hectoring people into a "debate" over things that are completely outside of the realm of reality.

Scud missles and MOABs will soon be for sale in the sporting goods department at Wal-Mart, fyi. I recommend getting there early before they're sold out.

 

[Justin]

ome leftist always asks "should we let people have hydrogen bombs,then?"

i am willinng to go that far myself,not supporting the right to bear hydrgen bombs.

It's a completely moot discussion. No one is ever going to legalize private ownership of nuclear weapons.

Even if nukes were legalized, they would be so cost-prohibitive to purchase, let alone maintain and store, that no one could afford one anyway, assuming the manufacturers would even deign to sell them on the open market.

However, some people seem to believe that since both ICBM's and firearms are weapons that they're somehow analogous. An AR15 is a weapon. A nuke is a weapon, therefore a nuke is the same as an AR15.

Debating private ownership of WMD's is, at best, mental masturbation, and at worst a distraction from actually moving the goals of the RKBA community forward.

 

[TexasRifleman]

The argument they try to make with that is so far outside of reality that it is sad that they even bring it up. I will ask him again. Does he know anyone who could afford such a weapon? Has he ever seen a hydrogen bomb in person? Since by his reasoning they would seem to be easy to get if it were not for the laws "protecting" us from them.

Most information on hydrogen warheads is classified of course, but what is out there seems to indicate that the smallest self contained warhead is going to weigh in the 800-900 pound range.

I'm thinking ankle holster......

And again, the accepted definition of arms as relates to the Second Amendment is "in common use".

 

[BhmBill]

Most information on hydrogen warheads is classified of course, but what is out there seems to indicate that the smallest self contained warhead is going to weigh in the 800-900 pound range.

I'm thinking ankle holster......

Have you never carried arms before, sir?

A shoulder rig is clearly needed for nukes.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Have you never carried arms before, sir?

A shoulder rig is clearly needed for nukes.

I defer to your expertise. I've not ever tried to "keep and bear" arms that exceed about 200 pounds.

 

[Robert]

"hold on while I whip this out..."

So where should I park this really heavy Coke machine?
As always Justin makes the point better than I ever could. A nuke is not an AR.

 

[TexasRifleman]

So where should I park this really heavy Coke machine?

Excuse me, your hydrogen warhead seems to be printing. That's "brandishing" around here. Cover it up.

 

[BhmBill]

I defer to your expertise. I've not ever tried to "keep and bear" arms that exceed about 200 pounds.

I occasionally CC one of these....



.... in a Fobus shoulder holster (cannon + 4 man loading crew) .

Feel free to be jealous.

 

[Robert]

Small of the back I assume?

 

[Justin]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't black powder canons nigh on unregulated?

 

[BhmBill]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't black powder canons nigh on unregulated?

By the feds, no. By local ordinances, yes. They require registration and a 6 hour CCW course in order to CC.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't black powder canons nigh on unregulated?

Which is of course why they are used so often in crime.

If you will take a look here at the crime reports...

Wait. There aren't any in here.

Felons can buy them too? At Cabelas? Without background checks!

JEEZUS ALMIGHTY!

The blood must be flowing in the streets!

Handguns, totally unregulated, sold at retail stores with no background checks?

Haven't we been told here in 21 pages that this kind of thing simply CANNOT work in 2009? That "things are different now" and criminals will just buy them and the next thing you know, bodies everywhere.

 

[Justin]

Clearly we need to close the Federal Black Powder Canon Loophole!

 

[Robert]

clearly they fall into the rapid fire assault weapon category, what with the shoulder thing that goes up and all...

 

[TexasRifleman]

what with the shoulder thing that goes up and all...

Perfectly legal. No background checks. Sold in retail stores across the country.

Yes, you can't be selling any guns or the felons will just be all over them.

Thank goodness we have these "common sense" gun laws to keep us safe.

 

[Robert]

Nice. 1860 Army in .44?

 

[BhmBill]

Clearly we need to close the Federal Black Powder Canon Loophole!

I agree. We need to keep such arms out of the hands of criminals.

Would you trust this guy with high power weaponry?

 

[blkbrd666]

...a meta-study of the effectiveness of gun control conducted by the Center for Disease Control...

I like that...gun control...a disease.

 

[ilbob]

Most information on hydrogen warheads is classified of course, but what is out there seems to indicate that the smallest self contained warhead is going to weigh in the 800-900 pound range.

There are much smaller so called "backpack" atomic bombs that are man portable. Still generally prohibitively expensive for the average Joe.

It seems to me that making the jump from 6 shooters should be legal to own in DC to doing so requires that we also allow anyone that wants one to have an A-bomb is a bit of a leap.

It does seem to me to be a fair situation to explore though as you never know just how technology will develop. It is technologically and financially feasible for many people to have chemical weapons. In fact, just about anyone with a few hundred bucks can create poison gas on a serious scale.

Instead of the a-bomb hypothetical, why not discuss the poison gas possibility that is almost laughably easy to produce. Should poison gas be banned from private ownership?

After we discuss posion gas, we can talk about other WMD that the average Joe may be able to acquire and whether they should be legal to own.

 

[Rockwell1]

So, why is this thread still open?