Red1966
Well-Known Member
Are you willing to give up your rights?
Mass Murder by Blade, you Vast Idiots
- Thread starter Doer
- Start date
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Believe me, Miami has it's shit holes.
racerboy71
bud bootlegger
pork and beans anyone? liberty city?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
A good gun safe will stop all but the most determined and skilled of thieves.thumb print scanners and other biometric security options for guns have been tried. THEY DO NOT WORK. palm/print scanners in the grip were experimented with extensively. after just a few rounds they broke (guns go boom and electronics dont like booms) the most successful experiment so far was in a major metro PD using this: http://www.smartlock.com/smartgun_detail.htm however, anyone who wore the ring could use the gun, and it is just a matter of a few minutes for a competent tinkerer to remove the device, with or without the ring. even gun safes cannot prevent the theft of your guns if the thief is smarter than a potato and has the time and tools to crack the safe open. safes dont stop thieves, they only inconvenience them. your oft repeated (and imaginary) retina scan gun safe locks would be no more effective than any other gun safe. you can always authorize somebody else to access it, you can give somebody else the combination, or give them a copy of the key just like with normal locks. retina scans (still imaginary) would not prevent the controller of the program from authorizing his whole family to open the lock, or are you proposing the govt control who may or may not open your gun safe? if as some have assumed, you meant retina scanners on the gun itself, that is retarded. face it sweetie, you dont know enough about guns to offer solutions, nor are you qualified to judge the fitness of the ideas of others. the only way to ensure guns are used responsibly is to let responsible people own guns. the government is ill equipped to determine who is or is not responsible, and populist demagogues are even less qualified to make that judgement. but then you live in florida, where a guy who go impeached from the federal bench for taking bribes from mob bosses is considered a good choice for congress.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Yes, me me me. My rights and your intrusion for a pretty intellectual exercise of smug superiority. It is like AGW, and the embrace of Nukes + rejection of GMO. Just a pack of fear based lies and emotion tampering a la, 1984. Word twisting.
God Bless the 2nd Amendment. And even with that, the un-caring snobs in many states have their way.
Sky where is you list of when personal weapon permission could have helped?
I see the problem clearly: People get a hold of guns when you don't want them to. It's a simple fact. As far as I always thought, a magazine safety in a semi auto handgun is there in case somebody is trying to wrestle the gun out of your hands, and you think they might get it. You drop the magazine and the gun will not fire the bullet in the chamber.
I fully agree though, taking them all away would never work, and I wouldn't give mine up. I might give up one or two, but you can bet I have more stashed away if it came down to it.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Well, wave your hands and say 3 times, it is a simple fact. Good job!
But, you cannot show me, where keeping guns from people is not the main responsibility of having it. You cannot show me, any case where it makes a difference except those tragic cases of bad parenting. And you can't tell me that is a very large problem at all.
So, you can't say, any erosion of a basic Right over, blown up hysteria is worthwhile.
You can claim there is a problem, but you cannot prove it. And any "solution" that prevents defense and gets people hurt, is so far gone into the power grab it is a problem, not a solution.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
a gun safe will DELAY a dermined violator
when my uncle died he left no record of the combination for his gun safe.
gramps had that gun safe open in 20 minutes with a power grinder.
Doer
Well-Known Member
BTW, the record of the Nazi in Belgium is that those that admitted they had a gun to turn in, must have 3 more to torture you about.
And since you admitted you were weak willed and a coward, you were put on the slave labor list...since you signed up.
The Swedish Resistance Manual circa 1941, is a good read and can still be found. It is specific on this point. Don't sign up.
And since you admitted you were weak willed and a coward, you were put on the slave labor list...since you signed up.
The Swedish Resistance Manual circa 1941, is a good read and can still be found. It is specific on this point. Don't sign up.
I completely agree that it is the owners responsibility. But to say that guns getting into the hands of others isn't a problem while stressing how important it is for owners to protect their guns in things like safes is just contradictory. Is it a problem that is large enough to advise people to store their guns in a safe? Is that enough proof for you? Do I wave my hands here? To say that it isn't a problem worth reviewing is just baffling to me.
Do I think the problem is such that we need to mandate user specific safety devices? No, and I don't remember ever alluding otherwise. But if such a device came along that satisfied the 3 criteria I listed previously, I would at least consider it. Why wouldn't you want to take advantage of technological advancements? Of course, as I've already said, we are far from that technology today and the current safety devices we have in use all ready is the best we can do.
Edit: When I said I would consider it, I meant installing the device on my own guns, not mandating its use!
Are you saying my comment about turning in a weapon (in the context of my own government eroding my rights) because they already know I own some of the guns I have while keeping the ones they don't know about makes me a coward? You think I would turn in a weapon to an occupying force? heh. Ok. Can you also tell me my fortune?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Yeah, but he was determined. Most just want to get in and out as quick as they can.
Very true. I imagine safe crackers would be pissed if all they got were some guns unless it was something like Oswalds rifle or Booths pistol.
If we had a magical user specific safety device that could effectively eliminate the need for a safe, I would still keep all of my non-defensive weapons in one, even if they were out fitted with such a device.
It sure would be cool to be able to leave a pistol laying around that you know for sure can't be used by anybody else, though. It's an interesting thought to entertain.
If we had a magical user specific safety device that could effectively eliminate the need for a safe, I would still keep all of my non-defensive weapons in one, even if they were out fitted with such a device.
It sure would be cool to be able to leave a pistol laying around that you know for sure can't be used by anybody else, though. It's an interesting thought to entertain.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
If the gun is in use, I agree, there are no 'locking mechanisms' that are quick or reliable enough to use. No one wants to fuck with a fingerprint scanner, or retina scanner, or even have the risk of it not working, during a moment of crisis.1- don't tell us who gets to keep guns, you cannot take them. Go ahead and try. We will print the fuckers. OK? Get's to keep@?@?!@?? What a joke.
2- show me another case, JUST ONE, where a crazy person got a hold of another's gun. And don't you know, the Turnip's Mom would have just let him eyeball the damn thing?
3- we don't have the tech, and I know that
4- we don't have to compromise just because you make up problems. You want compromise? Amend the big C.
5- no one will buy these guns. You are proposing Mfgs, go out of business. And if you think tech is not defeat-able on a simple chunk of iron, propelling lead chunks, you are so wrong. We can PRINT them and we don't need no stinkin' scanners.
6- put down the Koolaide!
When the gun is being stored because you're not around it, I think some sort of locking mechanism should be mandatory. If not a locking mechanism, the bolt should be removed and stored elsewhere.
kelly4
Well-Known Member
I still don't understand what the solution is for...what's the problem?
Why do people need safes in their homes to keep criminals from getting them? Isn't breaking into someone's home and stealing their stuff illegal? Why won't the criminals follow the law? Why aren't they deterred by it?
Take your gun apart? Do you think criminals don't know how they go back together? Every time I leave the house you can bet i am not going to disassemble over 100 firearms just to make it a little more inconvenient for a thief who can get into the gun safe anyway. If the guy can get into my gun vault, I won't be able to stop him from getting my guns.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I would not have been able to shoot my brother.....or would I? Yep, shot him right in the chest across the kitchen with a 30-06.
My friend had the key to the guns, we get pulled the slug out of a round and wadded it with tissue paper. I came around the corner with it and BOOOOOMMMMMM!!!!!
I think we could have gotten hold of the trigger lock key. It was a deer rifle so didn't count as a murderous weapon and does not even today.
No harm done, just some powder grain cuts and a wad bruise. The look on his face though!!! Priceless. I was 14, he 13. We had a lot of rough play, back then.
But, that is different from what these anti-gun proposals are after. These have nothing to do with storage. It is an extra condition, if you will.
With the .45 ACP, C-1 is cocked and locked. C-2 is hammer down, live round.(needs to be cocked) C-3 is no round in battery and the slide must be worked.
So, these proposals add a C-0 as a finally impediment to defense. I already went through 3 Conditions to get to Ready, and I have 2 mechanical safes, after that.
So, my revolver, DA. Hammer is down on an empty. C-3. I don't do C-2, I only load 5 rounds. If I had 6 rounds there would be no C-3, no empty chamber to rest the firing pin.
All these locks and blocks do is provide a Stalking Horse for Agenda. But, they get people killed and they do not save lives.
So, do you think the anti-gun nuts are worried, really, about Storage? I don't.
They care to interrupt the heat of the moment. What they don't understand is that THIS IS the 2nd Amendment Right to live, that cannot be interrupted.
So, please Beef, don't go sounding "all reasonable," here. It plays right into their hands.
Doer
Well-Known Member
No one can answer that. Weird, huh? The problem is the Populist Press has provided a sort of universal FEAR and not by accident, by design.
No one can tell what is what for all the lies. And the liars themselves have no idea, for they just repeat the cants of evil Saganism.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
LOL - sorry, I'll try to be more irrational.Yeah, I would not have been able to shoot my brother.....or would I? Yep, shot him right in the chest across the kitchen with a 30-06.
My friend had the key to the guns, we get pulled the slug out of a round and wadded it with tissue paper. I came around the corner with it and BOOOOOMMMMMM!!!!!
I think we could have gotten hold of the trigger lock key. It was a deer rifle so didn't count as a murderous weapon and does not even today.
No harm done, just some powder grain cuts and a wad bruise. The look on his face though!!! Priceless. I was 14, he 13. We had a lot of rough play, back then.
But, that is different from what these anti-gun proposals are after. These have nothing to do with storage. It is an extra condition, if you will.
With the .45 ACP, C-1 is cocked and locked. C-2 is hammer down, live round.(needs to be cocked) C-3 is no round in battery and the slide must be worked.
So, these proposals add a C-0 as a finally impediment to defense. I already went through 3 Conditions to get to Ready, and I have 2 mechanical safes, after that.
So, my revolver, DA. Hammer is down on an empty. C-3. I don't do C-2, I only load 5 rounds. If I had 6 rounds there would be no C-3, no empty chamber to rest the firing pin.
All these locks and blocks do is provide a Stalking Horse for Agenda. But, they get people killed and they do not save lives.
So, do you think the anti-gun nuts are worried, really, about Storage? I don't.
They care to interrupt the heat of the moment. What they don't understand is that THIS IS the 2nd Amendment Right to live, that cannot be interrupted.
So, please Beef, don't go sounding "all reasonable," here. It plays right into their hands.
I don't know much about home invasion, but if I was a criminal and I broke into someones house to steal shit, and I came across a gun safe, I'd move on. Unless of course, I'm some 'supercriminal' that can break into safes super fast and quietly... then I'd totally rob that son of a bitch.
My long guns have a 'cut proof' wire going through the trigger guards and are store in a gun cabinet... Well, except for my Rem 870, that's got beside the bed.
Doer
Well-Known Member
So, to you the opposite of this fake "so reasonable" slip slope of Executive Power, is irrational? HA HaaaaaLOL - sorry, I'll try to be more irrational.
Check the mirror. You too may be a Saganist.