At least 18 kids dead....

He was able to shoot a hundred rounds within minutes. Can we all agree that however this weapon was configured should be outlawed and go from there? Unless you want to go on a shooting spree this setup is totally unnecessary. As I said, I live 2 miles from the incident and went to that school, I still don't want to own a gun. I feel very safe here. I guess living here my entire life is what makes me feel that way. Before this there was no crime. However, I do believe that this is cultural problem more than a gun problem. There's something about this country that breeds a high number of homicidal maniacs per capita.
 
Quote from 377OHMS:

Fully automatic?

Are you serious? Those require a "Dangerous Weapon Permit" and which is rarely given outside of the film industry. A federal tax stamp is required which can take 90-days to obtain.

The only large-scale crime I know of where full-auto weapons were employed was the North Hollywood Bank of America shootout. Those weapons were modified to full-auto illegally.

None of these mall killers or school killers has used a full-auto weapon. As usual you've just got the facts all wrong. How can someone be so stupid and at the same time so sanctimonious?

Please tell me more about the wonderful life you live and how much smarter and better you are than me. I never tire of those stories. I have to agree with you, you are wonderful, smart and great and would whoop my ass if you saw me, deservedly so I might add. Thank you great one.
 
Quote from bigarrow:

For that one extreme made up scenario, this is what we should base our national laws on. Why not make up a scenario where we need hand grenades and flame throwers and personal tanks?

And land mines, why shouldn't a God fearing American be allowed to protect his life and property with land mines?

What we need is common sense.
I'm okay with all those things and one day it may come to that.

I don't for a second believe the right to bear arms is limited to flintlocks.

Because the right to bear arms was to enable you to thwart a despotic govt not protect against flying squirrels.
 
Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

I'm okay with all those things and one day it may come to that.

I don't for a second believe the right to bear arms is limited to flintlocks.

Because the right to bear arms was to enable you to thwart a despotic govt not protect against flying squirrels.

At least your answer is consistant. And you're correct the 2nd admendment is there to protect ourselves against the government. It has nothing to do with hunting or sport.
 
Quote from kmgilroy89:

He was able to shoot a hundred rounds within minutes. Can we all agree that however this weapon was configured should be outlawed and go from there?
No because he likely used several weapons.

And quite frankly I wouldn't have cared if he had only used 1 weapon.

The fastest (world record) quick draw fire and hit a target is two hundredths of a second with a revolver.

So how you plan to protect yourself from experts by simply adopting a Luddite attitude is beyond me.
 
Quote from bigarrow:

At least your answer is consistant. And you're correct the 2nd admendment is there to protect ourselves against the government. It has nothing to do with hunting or sport.
Thank you .
 
great answer.

when did society start to really break down... there answer is simple.
what areas are the most broker down ... the answer is simple.
in the end it should not take traders very long to recognize the pattern.



a. the stress put on society by the fact that it takes two incomes to living a neighborhood with good schools is on thing.
then we have idiotic programs which allow people to get to 100% financing... which jacks the price of homes even higher.
We need the govt to stay the hell out of ht marketplace and let home prices fall back to 28 percent of peoples income.

b. part of the problem is that we no longer teach values and discipline and honor and God in schools. What a terrible combo... parent go off to work and we take honor out of the schools.

c. handout programs which make it financially advisable for parent to not be married are nuts. We should encourage parents to be in the home. Give a financial bump if the dads residence is the same place. Not the opposite.

We need to reward personal responsibility and parental responsibility and reverse the last 50 years of lunacy. We need to put values and character back in our institutions.

Quote from ammo:

growing up,mom was home,dad worked ,we played with the neighborhood kids, everyone's mom knew you,they were all home ,then homes ,everything got too expensive,you needed two incomes to survive,everyone started locking doors,neighbors stopped socializing,kids couldn't go out to play,socialize,learn for several years before becoming adults, how to handle society,divorces rose to 50%,75% of them had financial crises,kids at home socialized through computers,no human contact,size of families dropped,single child homes rose,single mothers raising kids rose,welfare paid single mothers per kid,so that became more prevalent. socially impoverished areas with little family value and little education found selling drugs as a lifetime vocation to pay bills,low law enforcement and little other means to support or amuse yourself made drugs even more popular,self medication to solve or deal with your problems is a growing problem,prisons are overcrowded,those with family values either keep to themselves or laud it as cheap perfume to further alienate the chances of it spreading, and it seems that is escalating.. around 1980 corporations who were loyal to lifelong employees, started giving them buyouts and early retirement, the value of the dollar and the devalueing of the human being is growing at a faster pace each day,it's eveident on ET as you see so many people disrespecting each other,something you would never do if you learned to socialize,you would know it's as much of an insult to your self and the other person as it is to society,social responsabilty used to mean working together to make this a great place, all the little efforts each made, made this country great,now social responsability is defined by a credit score..this site couldnt be a better example of the dumbing down of a once great country..viva la dinero
 
Quote from bigarrow:

At least your answer is consistant. And you're correct the 2nd admendment is there to protect ourselves against the government. It has nothing to do with hunting or sport.

The 2nd Amendment is completely irrelevant today with the way it is written.
 
Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

No because he likely used several weapons.

And quite frankly I wouldn't have cared if he had only used 1 weapon.

Who mistakes a semi for a full-auto? Don't liberals serve in the military?

I've noticed the left couldn't even wait one day to start politicizing what occurred. There are 20 sets of parents out there who are completely destroyed and will never be ok again for the rest of their lives.

Bloomberg was up in front of a podium pontificating about weapons bans a few hours after these kids were killed. Obama spoke because he is expected to and I thought he did a good job.

You can't fix this with a law.
 
Quote from 377OHMS:

Who mistakes a semi for a full-auto? Don't liberals serve in the military?


People that don't know the difference, as a matter of fact all full auto does is waste ammo.

When I was in the Army they were in the process of switching to 3 round bursts for increased accuracy and conservation of ammo.

I can assure you humping shit loads of ammo ain't no fun and slows you down.

Might want to ask leapup.
 
Back
Top