Gun Control and Logic

[Daryl Hunt]

Yea, but no. Revolvers are dumb for self defense, which is why the New Zealand’s new gun control laws the left is pushing for are bullshit. Change my mind. Less mantienance blah blah blah, I don’t care. It’s like, hey you can drive this old ass car with no power steering and breaks which means less maintainence and it’s got that classic look...nope, I’m good with the not so antiquated. Sorry if your a revolver guy, you’re not gonna shoot a snake on a rocking boat either. That’s just silly. You’d be lucky to do so with a sawed off.

Okay, I'll take the bait. You seem to consider revolvers obsolete; if this is what you believe, please explain your logic.

I'd like to hear this one as well. I LIKE revolvers. If I can't get the job done with 5 or 6 then maybe I shouldn't be carrying a gun in the first place. Okay, I am probably not the normal shooter but if you aren't at least capable then you should be carrying in the first place. In a combat shoot, I will only hit 61% of the time but that is under extreme pressure. That means that 6 rounds is good for 3 bad guys. If there are 4 armed bad guys, chances are I won't bag all 4 even if I had 30 rounds, one would bag me anyway. This ain't the movies.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

He's still an asshole who thinks courage comes from the barrel of a gun.

It sure doesn't hurt in the ole courage department to be strapped with a means of defense, right?



I would much rather have a gun when somebody is shooting up a theater than be a sitting duck meat target.

.

I have guns, they are my least used tools. I believe in the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms responsibly but i'll be damned if I can even comprehend living in an all-consuming pit of fear that the democrats are going to take all your shit.

Once again, you don't get that right from the 2nd amendment. That just means that the Federal Government can't deny you that right. It does leave it up to the States though who can regulate the firearms as the voters see fit.

…consistent with Second Amendment case law – neither the Federal government nor state governments may violate that case law.

Once again, you are ignoring the 14th amendment.

 

[progressive hunter]

He's still an asshole who thinks courage comes from the barrel of a gun.

It sure doesn't hurt in the ole courage department to be strapped with a means of defense, right?



I would much rather have a gun when somebody is shooting up a theater than be a sitting duck meat target.

.

I have guns, they are my least used tools. I believe in the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms responsibly but i'll be damned if I can even comprehend living in an all-consuming pit of fear that the democrats are going to take all your shit.

Once again, you don't get that right from the 2nd amendment. That just means that the Federal Government can't deny you that right. It does leave it up to the States though who can regulate the firearms as the voters see fit.

…consistent with Second Amendment case law – neither the Federal government nor state governments may violate that case law.

Once again, you are ignoring the 14th amendment.

but youre ignoring the 2nd amendment,,,

 

[Daryl Hunt]

He's still an asshole who thinks courage comes from the barrel of a gun.

when youre up against several people intent on killing you it helps, and will most likely save your life,,,,

If you are up against several people intent on killing you I suggest you should have taken a good look at your life options before you got into that conundrum long before you bought that gun.

Moron

I was walking home from a late shift when I got jumped by 3 thugs and ended up with 3 cracked ribs, a fractured eye orbital and a lacerated spleen. I guess I should have been like you and collected welfare instead of working

You chose to be there in that situation. It's like a woman walking down a street that is known for having many rapes wearing a mini skirt with no underwear wondering why she was raped 4 times in one month. She, like you, could have made better choices. I certainly would have.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It sure doesn't hurt in the ole courage department to be strapped with a means of defense, right?



I would much rather have a gun when somebody is shooting up a theater than be a sitting duck meat target.

.

I have guns, they are my least used tools. I believe in the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms responsibly but i'll be damned if I can even comprehend living in an all-consuming pit of fear that the democrats are going to take all your shit.

Because they tell us they are going to ban guns....all the time......

There is not even majority support for an assault weapons ban among democrats let alone a total ban on guns.

If you use the term "Assault Rifle" you are right. But when you use the term "AR-15 and it's various clones" then you are wrong in both the voters and the Courts. Stop making shit up.

Or IOW a common rifle chambered for 5.56 mm rounds that has some black plastic accessories

If a M-2 were mass produced in huge quantity, it could be called a Common Rifle as well and be chambered for 20mm and have plastic accessories. Does that make it a common rifle? Should that be allowed to be mounted on every CJ-5 and 7 jeep out there and be driven down the roads? A line has to be drawn somewhere between firearms meant for Combat and meant for Hunting.

 

[Wry Catcher]

They didn't used to be. But they tried to enforce your stupid ideas and got bit in the ass and it cost them hundreds of millions of dollars in the process along with a whole bunch of high dollar sponsors.

If we stop pushing for more gun freedoms, we will end up with fewer.

If the commies would stop trying to pass more restrictive legislation, we would leave well-enough alone. They push. I push.

.

Infected by the RED SCARE ^^^, author needed to be inoculated with an anti biddable vaccine.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I am quite right and you know it. It's been upheld in the courts. And the Municipals have even more power along those lines. Yah, I know, it's all against the Constitution and it's a Conspiracy and all that.

just because some dem or repube judge said its true doesnt mean its true,,,

It's legal. You want it to change, change the laws. Simple as that. Get off your ass and get your own candidates into office.

I like the law the way it reads,,,its dems and repubes that have the problem,,,,its them we need to get rid of

Actually, as of last week, so do I. In Colorado, the last piece fell into place. We don't need anymore gun laws. And it's working. Now, if only Kansas would stop selling our border people firearms without back ground checks we would be much happier. Same goes for Oklahoma and Arizona. But that is such a small amount it's really not worth worrying about. We went from the #1 Mass Shooting State to the Zero Mass Shooting State. We also keep over 120 vicious felons per year from buying guns with our background checks by busting them and getting them back into Prison. Funny about that, the gunnutters say they want to be tough with the criminals yet when we stop them from buying guns that they clearly are not supposed to have and send them back to prison for buying those guns then we are inhibiting their rights. Then they say that we need to be tougher on criminals. Which is it? Meanwhile, over 600K of background checks were done successfully.

In a couple of months, I need to purchase a little 380. It will take me about 10 minutes time from the time I enter the store to the time I walk out of the store with the gun. Or maybe a little 38 special 5 shot revolver. Either way, it's no big thing Like I said, I like the laws as they are. We have enough. Not too many and not too few.

You do know it is illegal to buy a gun in another state without that gun being shipped to an FFL dealer in you state of residence don' you?

So I guess all those CO gun laws don't do shit to stop the illegal transfer of guns

An in CO an AR 15 is perfectly legal if it doesn't have a couple add on doodads

To some, an Illegal is a sick bird when it comes to firearms background checks. To you, that's a mighty sick bird.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

He's still an asshole who thinks courage comes from the barrel of a gun.

It sure doesn't hurt in the ole courage department to be strapped with a means of defense, right?



I would much rather have a gun when somebody is shooting up a theater than be a sitting duck meat target.

.

I have guns, they are my least used tools. I believe in the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms responsibly but i'll be damned if I can even comprehend living in an all-consuming pit of fear that the democrats are going to take all your shit.

Once again, you don't get that right from the 2nd amendment. That just means that the Federal Government can't deny you that right. It does leave it up to the States though who can regulate the firearms as the voters see fit.

…consistent with Second Amendment case law – neither the Federal government nor state governments may violate that case law.

Judges in the 4th, 9th and 2nd Circuit courts of appeal are already violating the Heller decision, the Caetano decision and ignoring Scalia and what he wrote in the Friedman v Highland park decision....so you are wrong....again.

You made a blanket empty statement. Just how and what are the rulings are they making that are in violation of those SCOTUS rulings? You've done this many times and each time, you got handed your butt. Now is you chance (once again) to justify your statement. Go for it cupcake.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

He's still an asshole who thinks courage comes from the barrel of a gun.

Courage comes from having the spine to confront a vicious criminal trying to hurt or kill you and shooting them. spineless cowards like you could not do it.

I've seen the bravest talking, most fearsome person get under fire and curl right up into a ball. You have no idea what you are going to do no matter how brave you talk. Most ones that talk the bravest are the ones that are the ones that you have to watch closely because they are the most likely to do something stupid under fire. It's the quiet ones that are the ones that generally are the best ones. You bare close observation.

No one is going to be getting into a firefight in any self defense situation

thats just stupid thinking from a future dead person,,,

Actually, the chances of getting hit by lightning twice is more likely than any of us getting into that situation. Now, we can change the odds by standing on a high bare hill during a thunder storm while holding a steel rod over our heads while standing in a tub full of water. But would that be rather stupid if you you weren't struck by lightning the second time?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It sure doesn't hurt in the ole courage department to be strapped with a means of defense, right?



I would much rather have a gun when somebody is shooting up a theater than be a sitting duck meat target.

.

I have guns, they are my least used tools. I believe in the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms responsibly but i'll be damned if I can even comprehend living in an all-consuming pit of fear that the democrats are going to take all your shit.

Once again, you don't get that right from the 2nd amendment. That just means that the Federal Government can't deny you that right. It does leave it up to the States though who can regulate the firearms as the voters see fit.

…consistent with Second Amendment case law – neither the Federal government nor state governments may violate that case law.

Once again, you are ignoring the 14th amendment.

but youre ignoring the 2nd amendment,,,

I am using the WHOLE Constitution of the United States. Not just the part that I agree with. You either accept the whole thing or reject the whole thing and become a traitor.

 

[progressive hunter]

I have guns, they are my least used tools. I believe in the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms responsibly but i'll be damned if I can even comprehend living in an all-consuming pit of fear that the democrats are going to take all your shit.

Once again, you don't get that right from the 2nd amendment. That just means that the Federal Government can't deny you that right. It does leave it up to the States though who can regulate the firearms as the voters see fit.

…consistent with Second Amendment case law – neither the Federal government nor state governments may violate that case law.

Once again, you are ignoring the 14th amendment.

but youre ignoring the 2nd amendment,,,

I am using the WHOLE Constitution of the United States. Not just the part that I agree with. You either accept the whole thing or reject the whole thing and become a traitor.

but you still ignore the 2nd so whats that make you???

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Once again, you don't get that right from the 2nd amendment. That just means that the Federal Government can't deny you that right. It does leave it up to the States though who can regulate the firearms as the voters see fit.

…consistent with Second Amendment case law – neither the Federal government nor state governments may violate that case law.

Once again, you are ignoring the 14th amendment.

but youre ignoring the 2nd amendment,,,

I am using the WHOLE Constitution of the United States. Not just the part that I agree with. You either accept the whole thing or reject the whole thing and become a traitor.

but you still ignore the 2nd so whats that make you???

I am using the whole constitution, not just the part that I interpret to read whatever I want it to read. Remember, the original interpretation of "Thou Shalt not Kill" was actually "Thou Shalt not commit Murder".

 

[progressive hunter]

…consistent with Second Amendment case law – neither the Federal government nor state governments may violate that case law.

Once again, you are ignoring the 14th amendment.

but youre ignoring the 2nd amendment,,,

I am using the WHOLE Constitution of the United States. Not just the part that I agree with. You either accept the whole thing or reject the whole thing and become a traitor.

but you still ignore the 2nd so whats that make you???

I am using the whole constitution, not just the part that I interpret to read whatever I want it to read. Remember, the original interpretation of "Thou Shalt not Kill" was actually "Thou Shalt not commit Murder".

BUT YOU IGNORE THE 2ND OPENLY,,,,

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear

 

[sakinago]

Yea, but no. Revolvers are dumb for self defense, which is why the New Zealand’s new gun control laws the left is pushing for are bullshit. Change my mind. Less mantienance blah blah blah, I don’t care. It’s like, hey you can drive this old ass car with no power steering and breaks which means less maintainence and it’s got that classic look...nope, I’m good with the not so antiquated. Sorry if your a revolver guy, you’re not gonna shoot a snake on a rocking boat either. That’s just silly. You’d be lucky to do so with a sawed off.

Okay, I'll take the bait. You seem to consider revolvers obsolete; if this is what you believe, please explain your logic.

I'd like to hear this one as well. I LIKE revolvers. If I can't get the job done with 5 or 6 then maybe I shouldn't be carrying a gun in the first place. Okay, I am probably not the normal shooter but if you aren't at least capable then you should be carrying in the first place. In a combat shoot, I will only hit 61% of the time but that is under extreme pressure. That means that 6 rounds is good for 3 bad guys. If there are 4 armed bad guys, chances are I won't bag all 4 even if I had 30 rounds, one would bag me anyway. This ain't the movies.

5 round wheels (mostly) a third of most 9mm, stupid to reload, stupid to carry ammo, basically triple the trigger weight pull of a semi auto throwing off aim, usually made with lightweight metals so they have more kick, and J-frames aren’t at all comfortable to shoot. They are over a century old technology. I’ll go back to my car analogy. If your buying your kid or whoever a car, would you want to buy them a classic car without power steering, power breaks, and antilock breaks? No. Yes they can be fun to shoot, and there are some badass looking ones, but they are not as practical.

Also I don’t know how or why your setting up shooting scenarios in your head, following your own rules. You’re not gonna know how a shooting is gonna go down, how far they are, what kind of drop they have on you, how many of them there are, what they’re using, if they’re behind cover, etc. I also don’t know how you know your combat accuracy? Training is way different from actual combat with adrenaline coursing through your veins, causing hands to tremble, heavy breathing, etc. Its a very common them you hear from cops who been involved in shootings that they miss because it’s not at all like it is in the range. Cops and soldiers use A LOT of ammo in a fire fight, because fire superiority usually wins out. You could empty your revolver in a matter of a few seconds, you might be trying to keeping someone’s head behind cover so they can’t pop some shots off at you. I get guys love their revolvers just like some guys are die hard about keeping everything original in their classic car with no power steering or breaks. It’s antiquated tech and there’s no getting around it.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

that wasnt my question,,,

I'll answer your questions as I see fit. I understand your argument so I will answer specifically. I have a smoke detector but I do not think it protects me from the government. I wear a seat belt but I do not think it protects my individual rights.

it would be pretty stupid if you did think those things,,,
they arent a gun after all,,,which as we know not only protects you from not just the government but criminals as well,,,and it is what protects your rights,,,

My gun only ever protected me once, from a snake. I would have rather had a good stick.

What kind of gun? I hope it wasn’t semi-automatic. And what if that snake was a bear? Would you still prefer the stick? I live close to the Jersey border in PA. NJ has retarded bear hunting laws and surprise suprise, they have a brown bear problem. A bear problem that spills over into my neck of the woods. News flash, bears are huge dicks. They WILL fuck you up if you startle them, they have Cubs...or if they’re hungry they’ll eat you alive ass first (true story).

I live in bear country & have hunted deer in bear country for 40 years. I have never seen a bear in the woods. I usually see them while driving or maybe from my deck.

I've ran into several bear while in the backcountry. I carry a .357 when hiking into the backcountry. Never had to use it but wouldn't hesitate if charged.

 

[RealDave]

Second Amendment.

To keep & bear arms.

What does that mean?

1) any weapon known to man?
2) Certain weapons
3) You get a .22 single shot - you are now armed STFU.

 

[Blues Man]

He's still an asshole who thinks courage comes from the barrel of a gun.

when youre up against several people intent on killing you it helps, and will most likely save your life,,,,

If you are up against several people intent on killing you I suggest you should have taken a good look at your life options before you got into that conundrum long before you bought that gun.

Moron

I was walking home from a late shift when I got jumped by 3 thugs and ended up with 3 cracked ribs, a fractured eye orbital and a lacerated spleen. I guess I should have been like you and collected welfare instead of working

You chose to be there in that situation. It's like a woman walking down a street that is known for having many rapes wearing a mini skirt with no underwear wondering why she was raped 4 times in one month. She, like you, could have made better choices. I certainly would have.

What a condescending asshole you are.

I was living and working in that area for a couple years and walked that route 7 nights a week.

I got unlucky

That is all

 

[Blues Man]

just because some dem or repube judge said its true doesnt mean its true,,,

It's legal. You want it to change, change the laws. Simple as that. Get off your ass and get your own candidates into office.

I like the law the way it reads,,,its dems and repubes that have the problem,,,,its them we need to get rid of

Actually, as of last week, so do I. In Colorado, the last piece fell into place. We don't need anymore gun laws. And it's working. Now, if only Kansas would stop selling our border people firearms without back ground checks we would be much happier. Same goes for Oklahoma and Arizona. But that is such a small amount it's really not worth worrying about. We went from the #1 Mass Shooting State to the Zero Mass Shooting State. We also keep over 120 vicious felons per year from buying guns with our background checks by busting them and getting them back into Prison. Funny about that, the gunnutters say they want to be tough with the criminals yet when we stop them from buying guns that they clearly are not supposed to have and send them back to prison for buying those guns then we are inhibiting their rights. Then they say that we need to be tougher on criminals. Which is it? Meanwhile, over 600K of background checks were done successfully.

In a couple of months, I need to purchase a little 380. It will take me about 10 minutes time from the time I enter the store to the time I walk out of the store with the gun. Or maybe a little 38 special 5 shot revolver. Either way, it's no big thing Like I said, I like the laws as they are. We have enough. Not too many and not too few.

You do know it is illegal to buy a gun in another state without that gun being shipped to an FFL dealer in you state of residence don' you?

So I guess all those CO gun laws don't do shit to stop the illegal transfer of guns

An in CO an AR 15 is perfectly legal if it doesn't have a couple add on doodads

To some, an Illegal is a sick bird when it comes to firearms background checks. To you, that's a mighty sick bird.

No you're a mighty sick bird

You say you want all this extra regulation on one rifle then you say you don't need any more gun laws in CO even though that very same rifle is legal as long as it doesn't have some add on doodads

 

[Blues Man]

I have guns, they are my least used tools. I believe in the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms responsibly but i'll be damned if I can even comprehend living in an all-consuming pit of fear that the democrats are going to take all your shit.

Once again, you don't get that right from the 2nd amendment. That just means that the Federal Government can't deny you that right. It does leave it up to the States though who can regulate the firearms as the voters see fit.

…consistent with Second Amendment case law – neither the Federal government nor state governments may violate that case law.

Once again, you are ignoring the 14th amendment.

but youre ignoring the 2nd amendment,,,

I am using the WHOLE Constitution of the United States. Not just the part that I agree with. You either accept the whole thing or reject the whole thing and become a traitor.

Keep trying to back peddle from the idiotic statement that the Bill of Rights is not part of the Constitution.

 

[Hale]

We are NOT coming for your guns if you are a law abiding citizen. Simple as that. That means, if there is a firearms regulation and you choose not to follow it you are no longer a law abiding citizen.

Translation: "We're coming for your guns."