Good guy with a gun...

I

Illinois Enema Bandit

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
You didn't check what is actually proposed. If it had been what you say, then I agree, the bill would be shit stupid and would be a ban on just about any gun design for a long time. The real shit stupid here is a reaction to the name without checking facts. The proposal is to reinstate the last albeit failure of a ban implemented under Bill Clinton and sun-setted in the mid 2000's. That ban had a specific list of weapons and a few features such as a Rambo sized clip, the only non military purpose being mass murder. Any title of a few words is vague, which is why people should at least check the facts before jumping to conclusions.

The ban proposed has no bearing on Medical MJ patient's rights to own a gun, any gun, even a black powder antique. And Clinton or Obama have nothing to do with that. That is because MJ is a schedule 1 listed drug by act of Congress and enforced by the DEA. Anybody who uses one of the drugs on that list by some twisted logic hasn't the right to own a firearm. This, by the way, includes anybody who uses MJ for any reason in legal states like mine. This is a shit stupid issue that's been around for a long time and I'm not going to argue with you about it. Get MJ rescheduled and this issue goes away.

I've said before that I have no interest in taking guns away from any sane user. I don't support the "assault weapons ban" either. I'm just responding to @desert dude 's shit stupid assertion that Clinton is planning to take all guns away from civilians. Desert Dude is not lying when he says that because to lie requires enough understanding to be stating a falsehood. He's just ignorant and repeating what is said to him by gun buddies. The fact is that Clinton is only on record for supporting the reinstatement of an assault weapons ban enacted under Clinton which was easy to get around and if anything encouraged more gun sales. For all intents and purposes this just a political statement by Clinton and her opponents are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Basically, I only know what I read. I'm no activist in this area. If anybody wants to check up on what I said and call me out for being wrong then please dig up something more than call me stupid and say nuh uh.

Here are links to two mainstream media sites that contain most of what I know about what Clinton is proposing. I'm not defending any of this, I just want the argument to at least stick to the facts. Note that Clinton doesn't list an assault weapons ban as a plank in her platform. She said two years ago that she thinks it would limit gun violence.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/27/hillary-clinton-is-the-new-standard-bearer-for-gun-control-so-lets-look-at-her-record/?tid=a_inl
In 2014 at a CNN town hall, she told an audience member she thinks reinstating the assault weapons ban and a ban high-capacity magazines would help limit gun violence.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/where-hillary-clinton-stands-on-gun-control/
Clinton advocates for “common sense gun laws”
She wants to expand background checks
Clinton pledges to close loopholes in existing firearm laws
Clinton would repeal immunity protections for the gun industry
Click to expand...
I only tied the legal mj issue to this to show how stupid this proposed ban of firearms is as well as the ban on magazines over 10 rounds,any 10 year old can dump an empty magazine & reload in 5 seconds or less,restricting mag capacity will in no way save lives or protect the public .

the med mj issue has relevance because we both know my being a schedule 1 drug is ridiculous,yet its being used to take away rights of citizens by the federal government,which speaks directly to the governments inability to pass legaslation concerning firearms using common sense .

I know for sure once we give government an inch they will take a mile on every issue,once we give in on this firearm restriction there will be another set of restrictions to follow,its the way of our government in all matters .
 
I

Illinois Enema Bandit

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
by "decent man", do you mean tattooing neo-nazi imagery across my back, like you have?
Click to expand...
just the regular normal guy u could have a beer with & not have to worry he will get mad at you later on,flip the fuck out,then try everything in his power to get u fired or arrested because you somehow offended him,that kind of normal guy.

the above words read like hieroglyphics to you didn't they :hump:
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Illinois Enema Bandit said:
just the regular normal guy u could have a beer with & not have to worry he will get mad at you later on,flip the fuck out,then try everything in his power to get u fired or arrested because you somehow offended him,that kind of normal guy.

the above words read like hieroglyphics to you didn't they :hump:
Click to expand...
what do you like best about the neo-nazi imagery you got tattooed across your back?
 
I

Illinois Enema Bandit

Well-Known Member
testiclees said:
CRINGE. The desperate grunts of a drooling imbecile, bitch.

You are so fucking critterishly awkward and stupid just shut your cock hole bitch and stick to emojis they make you seem less sickeningly pathetic.
Click to expand...
oh how I weep from the words flowing from your vajanosis reeking mouth and quiver in fear of your singular infected testicle :cry:

I reccomend penicillin and fast :bigjoint:
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Illinois Enema Bandit said:
I only tied the legal mj issue to this to show how stupid this proposed ban of firearms is as well as the ban on magazines over 10 rounds,any 10 year old can dump an empty magazine & reload in 5 seconds or less,restricting mag capacity will in no way save lives or protect the public .

the med mj issue has relevance because we both know my being a schedule 1 drug is ridiculous,yet its being used to take away rights of citizens by the federal government,which speaks directly to the governments inability to pass legaslation concerning firearms using common sense .

I know for sure once we give government an inch they will take a mile on every issue,once we give in on this firearm restriction there will be another set of restrictions to follow,its the way of our government in all matters .
Click to expand...
If you just want to take pot shots then fuck off. If you want to discuss what's really on the table then let's do so. If you just want to say no way to any firearm restrictions then tell me why and I'll be glad to talk.

Radical opposition by gun owners to any restrictions on guns is a losing side because gun ownership is a shrinking part of the US population. More and more people who don't own guns are becoming impatient with the unchanging level of gun violence in the US compared to any other western industrial nation. One only needs to look to Canada to see a country that is much like ours but with an order of magnitude lower level of gun related death, injury and violence. Even the rate of accidents where unintended discharging a gun accidentally kills or maims is five times higher in the US than other comparable nations. Those nations have more restrictive gun laws and they seem to be working. Eventually the super majority of non gun owners in this country are going to say "enough" and I can guarantee you that gun owners won't be happy with the result.

I agree that certain measures, such as the Assault Weapons Ban enacted under Bill Clinton was a loser. I think that if gun owners took ownership for reducing gun death and violence that they could do a better job of it than non gun owners. It's easy to sit back and throw rocks at people who are trying to fix the problem and . So, what can work? Why don't gun owners recognize the role they can play in reducing gun related death and violence? I'd like to see if we can bring those numbers down without draconian restrictions. As I said earlier, non gun ownership is increasing and eventually we will reach a tipping point where political power is wrested away from the gun lobby. There is no good reason why the US should have this high a level of gun deaths and violence. To avoid draconian gun laws, gun owners need to step up and take at least some ownership for reducing these numbers.
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
Hillary wants to confiscate guns. Hillary has no respect for the Constitution, just like many on RIU. Incidentally, I am not saying Trump is a better potential president. On 2A Trump might be better, and worse on other issues. I know this galls lefties such as @Fogdog, but I am not a Trump supporter. The two parties have nothing but shit to offer the US this election year. Johnson is the best choice in November; he gets my vote.

Hillary should be in jail, and Trump should be selling soap on his reality TV show.

Hillary on the Australian confiscation:

"The Australian government, as part of trying to clamp down on the availability of automatic weapons, offered a good price for buying hundreds of thousands of guns, and then they basically clamped down going forward in terms of having, you know, more of a background-check approach, more of a permitting approach,” Clinton said.

The Australian government purchased more than 650,000 guns from citizens in the compulsory 1996 buyback program."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/257172-hillary-australia-style-gun-control-worth-looking-at
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top