Poll: Do you support the right to bear arms?
Yes
No
Keep Hunting Rifles Only
Pistols but not AR(s) + 3
Assualt Rifles + 3 & 4
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-04-2014, 01:59 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(23-04-2014 01:49 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(23-04-2014 01:42 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  In an unarmed society, the guy with the biggest muscles can force those weaker to do whatever they want because they can not fight back effectively.
That's not true.
I live in a mostly unarmed society and the muscleheads don't rule the roost. In fact if the muscleheads excert physical violence then they get a criminal record and can't travel and sometimes go to prison.

I wasn't talking about ruling the roost. I was talking about intimidation and threats that happen on a personal level. In your unarmed society, if someone much larger and stronger than you decides that he wants your wallet, or your car, or your mate. There's not a whole lot you can do in the present to prevent it. Unless there is a cop standing right there, they are fairly worthless except to write up a report and investigate.

Yeah, sometimes they get in trouble and go to prison. That happens even in an armed society. They generally don't care, or think they won't get caught. Saying "the police will find you" is a terrible deterrent to a criminal.
Quote:
(23-04-2014 01:42 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  When I am armed, no one can threaten me by physically over powering me, which is not hard to do to me. If everyone is armed and they have a disagreement, they must chose between a peaceable resolution or a gun battle. No one wants to get into a gun battle.
Some people would love the excitement of a gun battle. I'm sure there are many Texan's who dream about having the opportunity to be the hero of the day.
I have discussed guns with others who have said they would pullout their gun and potentially kill someone if they caught them stealling their own car, even if their car was insured.
It seems to me having guns increases the potential of a gun fight.

Some people talk shit, but it doesn't make it so. How are you "sure" there are many texans that would love a gun battle? This seems to me to be a fairly ignorant statement as to how actual texans behave. Where are you getting your information? From the media? Yeah, that's an accurate description of our gun culture... Dodgy

Saying "having guns increases the potential of a gun fight" is ridiculous. You can't have a gun fight without a gun, so by definition (regardless of the actual statistics) having a gun takes the likelyhood of having a gun fight from 0% to some higher percent. It's disingenuous.

Excuse me, I'm making perfect sense. You're just not keeping up.

"Let me give you some advice, bastard: never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armor, and it can never be used to hurt you." - Tyrion Lannister
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like itsnotmeitsyou's post
23-04-2014, 02:12 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Depression? Really? I have depression and I am a gun owner. No, I don't think I shouldn't be able to own a gun because of it. My depression has no bearing on whether or not I am a violent person.
Do you not think that there is a link between depression and gun related mass killings?

(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  No, I don't think that I will automatically be safe because I also have a gun. That's stupid. However, I stand a MUCH better chance of surviving an attack if I can return fire. Would you rather sit there, terrified, waiting for the gunman to get to you, or would you rather fight back and stand a chance of taking him out. Saving your life and others in the process?
I would rather avoid the situation. Walk away if I can, give them my money if they ask for it.
Odds are, if they have the drop on me then I would get shot just reaching for a gun.
Best to avoid gun fights than to join them.

(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Gangs fight other gangs, but not exclusively. Gangs target entire neighborhoods for vandalism, theft, carjacking, etc.
Fine, but when did a gang get in a shoot out, randomly with civilians that they had no issues with?

If a gang is terrorising your neighborhood with vandalism and car theft then you are best to call the police rather than go in all gung ho and try to take them out with your guns.

(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  As I said, I live in a relatively low crime area, but even there I was subjected to being mugged.
Give them your money and walk away to live another day.

(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  For shooting targets at a target range a .308 bolt action will do just as well as an AK47 but for a tortured and depressed teenager an AK47 is much more useful when going on a killing spree at school.
No, it won't. The two guns have completely different capabilities, accuracies, and ranges. An AK is a much better gun to shoot close targets. My bolt action is much better for long range.
[/quote]
Sure, but you would still be able to enjoy target shooting without use of semi-automatic guns and on the plus people will not have the convenience of semi-automatic guns with they go on a killing spree.


(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Just because some people use a tool for terrible purposes doesn't mean that the tool is evil. Yeah, a depressed teenager may use an AK, or they may use a pistol, or they may perch atop a tower and take out 16 people and wound 32 others with a bolt action rifle. The responsibility for the action still rests upon the actor, not the stage or props.
That's fine, I am not advocating for putting guns into prison for the crimes they commit.
What I am advocating is to take away guns from people which are convenient for mass killings.


(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Lets say for an instant that the rioters were armed heavily and decided to go after the armed Koreans anyway. The Koreans still stand a hell of a lot better chances by being armed and returning fire than if they were to just roll over without a fight.
I think the Koreans would have had better chances by hiding than by shooting against an army.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2014, 02:19 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(23-04-2014 01:59 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  I wasn't talking about ruling the roost. I was talking about intimidation and threats that happen on a personal level. In your unarmed society, if someone much larger and stronger than you decides that he wants your wallet, or your car, or your mate. There's not a whole lot you can do in the present to prevent it. Unless there is a cop standing right there, they are fairly worthless except to write up a report and investigate.
This isn't true.
I live in such a society and these things don't happen like this. This is fear fueled propaganda.

(23-04-2014 01:59 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Saying "the police will find you" is a terrible deterrent to a criminal.
Giving the public guns and tell them to defend themselves in a lethal shoot out is a terrible strategy.

(23-04-2014 01:59 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Some people talk shit, but it doesn't make it so. How are you "sure" there are many texans that would love a gun battle? This seems to me to be a fairly ignorant statement as to how actual texans behave. Where are you getting your information? From the media? Yeah, that's an accurate description of our gun culture... Dodgy
By talking to people like you, who advocate being the hero, getting in a gun fight and saving others.


(23-04-2014 01:59 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Saying "having guns increases the potential of a gun fight" is ridiculous.
You can't have a gun fight without a gun, so by definition (regardless of the actual statistics) having a gun takes the likelyhood of having a gun fight from 0% to some higher percent. It's disingenuous.
It's not disingenuous, it's 100% accurate.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2014, 02:28 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
Depression can certainly play a factor into mass shootings. I think it often does, but it's a little naive to say depression=mass shootings. There is obviously a problem with youth when they go on shooting sprees and stabbing sprees. I'm not as concerned with the tool they use as much as I am on why they used it in the first place.

Every time I see the anti gun arguments, it's either we're looking for fights or waiting to kill someone, while we should actually run away, hide, give in to their demands, etc.

To running, hiding, and giving in...yes, I agree in most cases. If a criminal pulls a gun on me and demands my wallet, then by all means have it. If someone breaks into my home, I'm not going to risk my wifes safety. I don't care what your reason for breaking in is. You just forfeited your life. Hiding, running, and giving in are all very optimistic options, but a lot of times people don't have those options.

The religion of one age, is the literary entertainment of the next.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like =jesse='s post
23-04-2014, 02:32 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(23-04-2014 02:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Depression? Really? I have depression and I am a gun owner. No, I don't think I shouldn't be able to own a gun because of it. My depression has no bearing on whether or not I am a violent person.
Do you not think that there is a link between depression and gun related mass killings?
Depression, no. Psychopathy, yes.

Quote:
(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  No, I don't think that I will automatically be safe because I also have a gun. That's stupid. However, I stand a MUCH better chance of surviving an attack if I can return fire. Would you rather sit there, terrified, waiting for the gunman to get to you, or would you rather fight back and stand a chance of taking him out. Saving your life and others in the process?
I would rather avoid the situation. Walk away if I can, give them my money if they ask for it.
Odds are, if they have the drop on me then I would get shot just reaching for a gun.
Best to avoid gun fights than to join them.
Again, avoiding the situation is not always possible. In most cases, it is not. If it were, everyone would avoid the situations and no one would ever get shot.

Giving them your wallet is a fine option if that's all their after. It's just money and stuff that can be replaced. I notice that you dodged the other things I mentioned, like them wanting to rape someone, or beat them up. These things are NOT something that anyone anywhere should ever give in to.

You would run the risk of being shot if someone got the drop on you if you are not trained in the defensive use of a gun. An attacker will not know I have a gun (hence concealing) unless I reveal it. If I reveal it, it's because it is safe to do so. Training is extremely key here. Knowing how to react to an attacker is just as important as actually being armed.

Quote:
(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Gangs fight other gangs, but not exclusively. Gangs target entire neighborhoods for vandalism, theft, carjacking, etc.
Fine, but when did a gang get in a shoot out, randomly with civilians that they had no issues with?

If a gang is terrorising your neighborhood with vandalism and car theft then you are best to call the police rather than go in all gung ho and try to take them out with your guns.

What the hell are you talking about? I never said gangs do that. I said they sometimes target neighborhoods for crime, not shootouts. Please don't put words in my mouth or imply things I haven't said.

Again with the police. I live within a mile of the police HQ for my city. I had to call the cops on a prowler in my neighborhood once. By the time they got there, the guy was long gone and all they could do was take my statement. "when seconds count, the cops are only minutes away" rings especially true when you are being victimized by a criminal. When I was being car jacked, should I have simply asked the nice gentlemen to politely wait while I called the cops? If you know of gang activity in the neighborhood, yes, you should call the cops. If you are actively being the victim of a crime, calling the cops is about as effective as calling your mother.

What you are talking about is vigilante justice, and should NOT be condoned in any way shape or form. What I am talking about is defending my home and my loved ones against an immediate threat.

Quote:
(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  As I said, I live in a relatively low crime area, but even there I was subjected to being mugged.
No, it won't. The two guns have completely different capabilities, accuracies, and ranges. An AK is a much better gun to shoot close targets. My bolt action is much better for long range.
Sure, but you would still be able to enjoy target shooting without use of semi-automatic guns and on the plus people will not have the convenience of semi-automatic guns with they go on a killing spree.
Forgive me, but this is simply ignorant and ignores the larger issue. Target shooting is not the only reason I would want a semi auto gun. Defense is the biggest reason. How effectively am I going to defend my home with a bolt action rifle vs a semi auto?

Further, the actions of a very very small minority should never dictate what the majority can and can not do. That is known as tyranny. Just because some asshat decides to shoot his school up, does not in any way mean that I should not be able to own the same weapon as was used for evil. The tool is not evil, the person is.

Quote:
(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Just because some people use a tool for terrible purposes doesn't mean that the tool is evil. Yeah, a depressed teenager may use an AK, or they may use a pistol, or they may perch atop a tower and take out 16 people and wound 32 others with a bolt action rifle. The responsibility for the action still rests upon the actor, not the stage or props.
That's fine, I am not advocating for putting guns into prison for the crimes they commit.
What I am advocating is to take away guns from people which are convenient for mass killings.
To do this, you would have to eliminate ALL semi auto weapons. Do you know what the deadliest school shooter in American history used? I'll give you a hint: It wasn't a rifle. It was at Virginia Tech, and that piece of shit used two pistols. Small caliber, low capacity pistols at that.

What you are advocating is taking away guns from law abiding citizens in an ill advised attempt to remove a single tool from the toolbox of psychopathy.

All this is moot anyways because the guns already exist. In order to be able to ban ANY type of gun at this point, one would need to have a magic wand that could make them all disappear. If we passed a "no semi auto" law tomorrow. there would still be on the order of 200 million semi auto weapons that would need to be removed from law abiding citizens hands. good luck with that Dodgy

Quote:
(23-04-2014 01:37 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Lets say for an instant that the rioters were armed heavily and decided to go after the armed Koreans anyway. The Koreans still stand a hell of a lot better chances by being armed and returning fire than if they were to just roll over without a fight.
I think the Koreans would have had better chances by hiding than by shooting against an army.

Really? Cowering in a corner, waiting for them to overrun the place and find them would be preferable to attempting a defense of their lives? That's a bit naive.

Excuse me, I'm making perfect sense. You're just not keeping up.

"Let me give you some advice, bastard: never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armor, and it can never be used to hurt you." - Tyrion Lannister
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like itsnotmeitsyou's post
23-04-2014, 02:37 PM (This post was last modified: 23-04-2014 02:52 PM by itsnotmeitsyou.)
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(23-04-2014 02:19 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(23-04-2014 01:59 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  I wasn't talking about ruling the roost. I was talking about intimidation and threats that happen on a personal level. In your unarmed society, if someone much larger and stronger than you decides that he wants your wallet, or your car, or your mate. There's not a whole lot you can do in the present to prevent it. Unless there is a cop standing right there, they are fairly worthless except to write up a report and investigate.
This isn't true.
I live in such a society and these things don't happen like this. This is fear fueled propaganda.
Are you dense? THIS VERY THING HAPPENED TO ME. Quite personally and quite real. Here you are, telling someone who prevented a crime against himself, that guns preventing crime never happens. This DOES happen. It may never happen to you, but it does happen. Please stop pretending that it doesn't.
Quote:
(23-04-2014 01:59 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Saying "the police will find you" is a terrible deterrent to a criminal.
Giving the public guns and tell them to defend themselves in a lethal shoot out is a terrible strategy.
Yeah, because not defending themselves is a much better choice.
Quote:
(23-04-2014 01:59 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Some people talk shit, but it doesn't make it so. How are you "sure" there are many texans that would love a gun battle? This seems to me to be a fairly ignorant statement as to how actual texans behave. Where are you getting your information? From the media? Yeah, that's an accurate description of our gun culture... Dodgy
By talking to people like you, who advocate being the hero, getting in a gun fight and saving others.
I have not advocated for "being the hero" I have advocated for self defense and the defense of those I care about. I am not about to fling myself into a situation where guns are in play just because I have a gun.

People like you like to assume shit that isn't so about people like me and that's where the communication breaks down. Instead of actually listening and responding, you form preconceived notions of what a gun owner is and can't see past your own ignorance.

Quote:
(23-04-2014 01:59 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Saying "having guns increases the potential of a gun fight" is ridiculous.
You can't have a gun fight without a gun, so by definition (regardless of the actual statistics) having a gun takes the likelyhood of having a gun fight from 0% to some higher percent. It's disingenuous.
It's not disingenuous, it's 100% accurate.

It's accurate, but stupid. It's like saying "driving in a car increases your chances of being in a car accident" It's meaningless.

Excuse me, I'm making perfect sense. You're just not keeping up.

"Let me give you some advice, bastard: never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armor, and it can never be used to hurt you." - Tyrion Lannister
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2014, 02:41 PM (This post was last modified: 23-04-2014 02:56 PM by itsnotmeitsyou.)
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(23-04-2014 02:28 PM)=jesse= Wrote:  Every time I see the anti gun arguments, it's either we're looking for fights or waiting to kill someone, while we should actually run away, hide, give in to their demands, etc.

This. In fact, Stevil just accused me of this very thing and it's ultimately infuriating. I was once told that by being a gun owner, I was advocating for vigilantism and child murder. Not any argument or statement that I made. Simply by owning a gun... Dodgy


How about this, I'll not assume you're a complete moron if you don't assume that I WANT to kill someone simply for owning a gun. Deal?


This is why I generally avoid gun conversation on the internet. I joined this one because it appeared to be a rational discussion on matters that I am very knowledgeable about and thought I could help educate someone. I'll never learn. Even conversations like this that start out intelligent eventually draw someone in who has all kinds of idiotic preconceived notions about guns and isn't looking for a discussion, they're looking to reinforce their own deluded view.

Excuse me, I'm making perfect sense. You're just not keeping up.

"Let me give you some advice, bastard: never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armor, and it can never be used to hurt you." - Tyrion Lannister
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like itsnotmeitsyou's post
23-04-2014, 04:18 PM (This post was last modified: 23-04-2014 05:32 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(23-04-2014 01:33 PM)War Horse Wrote:  
(23-04-2014 01:29 PM)Stevil Wrote:  No, I don't believe that.
It sounds like propaganda spread by companies looking to sell guns.

What logic goes behind that thinking?

Well, would you mouth off or try pulling shit, knowing the other guy is armed as well ?

Not saying it wont happen, but odds are greatly improved to keep to the polite side of things.

Depends. Are we drinking? I think the reason they call it ATF is 'cause alcohol, tobacco, and firearms don't make for a good mix. Big Grin

(22-04-2014 05:54 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  The best defense is not a shotgun! First of all, the buckshot is going to hurt anyone in the immediate area. Second, at most you have two shots (presuming double barrel). Third, do you think a shotgun is easy to swing around in a hallway? The hallway is where 90% of all encounters with an intruder happen. A pistol is light, can hold 10 rounds, and isn't anymore "prone to accidents" than a shotgun.

The safety rules for pistols are the same for shotguns. A pistol is not an accident waiting to happen. That's sheer ignorance.

Sheer ignorance, huh. If I had a handgun I'd likely have eaten it long ago. Figuring out how to eat a shotgun requires much more creativity. First you either gotta be tall enough and have agile toes or you gotta invent some Rube Goldberg sorta contraption with strings and doors and shit. (You're short, tell me how you'd eat a shotgun). Both of which have a relatively high probability of being botched. I think it is you who are ignorant about how easy it is to eat a pistol compared to a shotgun. Tongue

And in the event of a home invasion and shotguns and hallways, I ain't going looking for you. I'm standing still in the back corner of my room waiting for you to show yourself in the doorway and then I'm cutting you in half. My wife and kids have their own shotguns and are trained in a similar technique. Don't go looking for trouble, let it come to you and cut it in half. As far as collateral damage, even birdshot or rocksalt won't have a spread pattern wider than the width of man in a 10-12 foot space. As jesse said, Know your target and know whats behind it.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2014, 05:04 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(23-04-2014 09:14 AM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  
(23-04-2014 08:50 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  The apostrophes around "'gun obsession'" were supposed to indicate a form of sarcasm...


I understand the self defence, though I do wonder how it gets to the point where that's a concern...

So, how do you feel about restrictions on firearms?

How does the need for self defense get to a point where one feels it is necessary to arm themselves? Simply by living in an area where there are people. A certain percentage of people are going to be criminals in modern society. The causes of which are a topic for another discussion. Those criminals need victims in order to be successful criminals. I refuse to allow myself to become one of those victims. As I've already stated, I almost was a victim of a mugging. Prior to that, a close family friend of mine was mugged, beaten, and killed. All in a neighborhood that has a very low crime rate. Crime does happen, and it can happen to anyone. Until we come up with a law enforcement solution that nets zero crime (or at least zero violent crime), I will feel it necessary to take the defense of my life seriously, and therefore carry a gun. Police can not be counted on to prevent crimes from happening. Our very own supreme court has ruled that they actually have no duty to protect you from crime. Their only duty is to report and investigate crime. But by that time, the crime has already been committed and there is already a victim.

On gun restrictions, I am for some of them and against many of them. As most americans are.

Background checks: Thumbsup However, some of the restrictions should be changed. Violent felons should never be allowed to own guns. They have already proven to society that they are violent individuals and by doing so have given up their right to own such a powerful tool. That being said, I don't think that ALL felons should lose their gun rights. There are over 64,0000 ways to commit a felony in America. Most of them are non-violent. These are things like fraud, perjury, or smoking a joint. These are not violent people and should not be denied the right to own guns.

Restrictions on what you can buy:

This is a mixed bag for me. I don't think that any type of conventional firearm should be disallowed. Even fully automatic weapons. Full autos are completely legal to own in the USA, all it requires is a clean background and a decent amount of money. I'm pretty OK with this restriction as it doesn't actually prevent me from buying one if I were so inclined. (I'm not, mainly due to the waste of money that full auto is. That, and I can rent one if I feel the need to spray bullets at a target) I do know several people who own fully automatic guns. They pretty much stay in the gun safe. They're not practical for any use, in general.

I am a huge proponent of concealed carry. I carry almost daily and as I have stated, have been saved from being a victim because of it. When I got my license to carry, I had to go through a weekend course in firearms safety and concealed carry laws. Personally, I think it should have been more training before letting people carry. I am a very experienced shooter, an excellent shot, and very knowledgeable on firearms. Even with those qualifications, having professional training taught me a few things. People that go out and buy a gun, never shoot it, and then go the weekend training course can get a license. These are not people that I would want to have my back in a dangerous situation.

Over all, I think gun education needs to be drastically increased. I have taken time out of my range time to help people be safer with guns and teach them how to properly aim. The better educated people are with their guns, the safe everyone around them will be.

Well it should go without saying that better education for anything is a must, which is pretty much why I'm here reading this: I'm really damn ignorant of this stuff and I've brains enough to admit that I'm ignorant on a topic like this; there are a lot of things I don't get.

I mean, why would fully automatic weapons ever be sold? That seems really excessive for the purposes of self defence anywhere but a battlefield (and if my studies have taught me anything, even there it's not that helpful). I can understand semi automatic weapons for hunting and defence, but the alternative just seems absolutely insane to me.

And I'm not too sure on the concealed carry thing either... Undoubtedly the mere presence of a gun is going to make would-be offenders think twice, so why bother hiding the fact that you have it? To surprise them? Make them think you are unarmed and thus encourage their advance?

I've spoken with KC on these sorts of topics before and we ended up chalking it up to cultural differences, maybe that was right after all. If you ever have the time and ability frankly I'd love to speak with you and others on this; it's a little easier for me than text.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2014, 05:11 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(23-04-2014 01:15 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(23-04-2014 05:29 AM)War Horse Wrote:  Because, unfotunatly, we're not all that civilized in the US , add to that somewhat of a lingering frontier mentality, gangs and other violent folks in this country, and you get people that want the most out of their "protection", tho very few are proficient in its use. Undecided
Does it make sense to make war guns available to the mentally ill, depressed or to violent or people with anger management issues?

What is a "war gun"?

Quote:Do you really think that if you too have a gun then you are safe because you will always win in a gun fight?

Gangs fight gangs, you can avoid them without guns.

(23-04-2014 06:22 AM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  I have only ever used mine for sport shooting. It's a semi-automatic rifle. The same as any other semi auto rifle that shoots 7.62. Full autos are highly restricted and generally only owned by collectors and people who like to waste money spraying bullets at a target.

It's no different than me buying a remington semi auto hunting rifle. The AK is less accurate than most other rifles, but it is reliable as hell. You can abuse an AK and it will still work just fine after shaking the dirt out. My other semi auto rifles that are more accurate need to be babied and cleaned regularly to function well. That's the main reason I own an AK. It is an inexpensive gun that fires a widely available cartridge that is also inexpensive. I can take the rifle to the range, practice with it, and not spend a small fortune on ammo. Some of my other guns I only shoot every so often because ammo is more expensive or currently unavailable.
For shooting targets at a target range a .308 bolt action will do just as well as an AK47 but for a tortured and depressed teenager an AK47 is much more useful when going on a killing spree at school.


(23-04-2014 06:25 AM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Ask shop owners in LA why they might need an AK during a riot. Having a semi auto rifle with 30 rds becomes very relevant when people are trying to break into your store, home, office and do bad things to you.
Yes, that is some crazy shit there.
How well would have the Koreans feared if the rioters also had war grade weapons, AK's, sniper rifles etc?
Are you yourself really that scared of being the target in a riot? Maybe it is time to move to a civilised and peaceful country rather than arm yourself to the hilt and hope that you are as good as Rambo against an "army" of opposition.

I don't think you have much knowledge of firearms. What is a "war grade weapon"?

Is either of these a "war grade weapon" or a "sniper rifle"?

[Image: 1Evil1Not.jpg]

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: