#NRAlogic

kpmarine said:

So do you have a 37mm flare gun that looks like a 40mm grenade launcher? Or do you have a 40mm grenade launcher? Anything with a bore of over 1/2" (Exempting most shotguns.) is a destructive device, and due for a $200 tax stamp and all the according paperwork. You're right, they're not "firearms"; they are classified in a much more controlled category.

Click to expand...

Thank you for backing up what I was saying...m203 is a DD (destructive device). so he lied when he said he owned one with no papers or tax stamp. Should not be surprised seeing that it comes from Modrama. What else he has lied about I now start to wonder.

ginwilly said:

So an armed person in schools is too big brother so we need to limit what people can purchase legally, monitor who purchases what, and tell everyone what they need and don't need. That's better. Not big brotherly at all.

Click to expand...

so you vote for no limits on weapon or ammo

kpmarine said:

That first part you quoted was to squelch the inevitable "You want to take all our guns!!" response. We both know you've never said, or even implied, such a thing; that I have seen, at least. I just wanted to openly throw that out there in a hope it might help this conversation, beyond ourselves, in a generally constructive direction. I'm not saying an armed presence EVERYWHERE, just in places where the state and federal gov. has final say; like public schools and other "gun free" zones. The places where "big brother" already has the final say in safety concerns. I'm not saying we should compel private property owners to allow a police guard at their Denny's. How is that too "big brother" for you?

I don't think we can agree on magazine capacities; due to a premise I believe to be flawed on your end. Like I pointed out, Virginia tech was a massacre where the shooter only had magazines with 15 rounds or less. I feel that more bullets do not solely equal more lethality. You're talking about reducing deaths, but it doesn't seem to be an efficient means. Adding a cumulative total of a minute or so to a person's delay in killing people seems to be less effective than having people on site to stop it sooner. Or possibly to be enough of an intimidation to prevent it from occurring in the first place.

Click to expand...

Question .....If you had a handgun that held 15 in the mag or an AR with a 100 round drum, which could you do more damage with.be honest with your answer.

londonfog said:

so you vote for no limits on weapon or ammo

Click to expand...

That's what I vote for...
If I was able, I'd construct me some THUD missiles and have me an arsenal of guided missiles vs anyone; not hard to make (in fact the JDAM is popular because it works, and it is simple to add to "dumb bombs".

I could easily add a CPU to run a thermo image that is as good or better than a jdam for sure. Control systems is one of my fortes

IDK why we tend to think that criminals will follow laws. FFS, if I were to go rouge, I would NOT follow the laws given, and would deal WAY more damage than the guy in boston today. In fact, I've passed the nuke test; meaning that I know how to build a 10k ton atom bomb; all I need is the U238 or the Plutonium... I literally can build a nuke; and have worked on such projects... And those aren't even rocket science; they are childs play compared to some of the projects we get.

I dont even care talking about it, because it is 50 years old. In fact, I believe it is Georgia Tech that makes their Masters Biotech students pass the nuke test to graduate. I might be wrong on the UNIV, but I'm sure one of the large named schools do; It's old tech.

fb360 said:

I have answered that question:
It depends, but the "DC" answer is that the killing power is equal. (i.e. If I only have to kill 1 person, a 30r clip vs a 10rclip wont matter, the job will be done)
They are equal, because each and every bullet has the same killing power. Each individual bullet can make a kill (it doesn't take 2). But, as I mentioned a 30r clip has a better chance of replicating kills than a 10r clip (obviously given the same accuracy).

I've watched every episode of all of those shows, and can say they do provide good education, but as with anything in life, it needs to be taken with a grain of salt, if you can determine why.

As I mentioned before, we are now into the "Meat". You make good points Bucky. You really do, if we were all to abide by your rules. But guess what? These assholes committing these crimes are NOT abiding by the "rules", and hence, what is more favorable to protect yourself against one of these mad men: a 10r clip, or a 30r clip? I ask you that. If you were trapped in a school with one of these assholes, what would you rather have?

Click to expand...

every gun used in that school shooting was purchased legally, so we have to argue from the point of what guns can be purchased legally. If some one came into a school with 4 -5 10 round magazines ( WTF is a clip). I would still feel I can take that asshole out with mine. At some point he will have to reload. Now if that same asshole is allowed to purchase and obtain legally 4 -5 30 round mags...then the wait for the reload is going to be a lot longer with more harmed. Don't want to even think about taking someone down with a drum mag.

fb360 said:

That's what I vote for...
If I was able, I'd construct me some THUD missiles and have me an arsenal of guided missiles vs anyone; not hard to make (in fact the JDAM is popular because it works, and it is simple to add to "dumb bombs".

I could easily add a CPU to run a thermo image that is as good or better than a jdam for sure. Control systems is one of my fortes

Click to expand...

says the guy who refers to magazines as clips. I vote for people to have knowledge of firearm terms

londonfog said:

every gun used in that school shooting was purchased legally, so we have to argue from the point of what guns can be purchased legally. If some one came into a school with 4 -5 10 round magazines ( WTF is a clip). I would still feel I can take that asshole out with mine. At some point he will have to reload. Now if that same asshole is allowed to purchase and obtain legally 4 -5 30 round mags...then the wait for the reload is going to be a lot longer with more harmed. Don't want to even think about taking someone down with a drum mag.

Click to expand...

Your statement made literally zero points; all heresay lol... Reloading does not take 30 seconds btw, more like 3-5; where you can easily duck away.

londonfog said:

says the guy who refers to magazines as clips. I vote for people to have knowledge of firearm terms

Click to expand...

Says the moron who writes a paragraph without making even a single point...

e; Make your argument based upon semantics (clip vs mag), I'll make mine based upon reality. (Ask UB or Harrekin; I design UAVs that shoot heat seeking missiles, they know what's up)

fb360 said:

Your statement made literally zero points; all heresay lol... Reloading does not take 30 seconds btw, more like 3-5; where you can easily duck away.



Says the moron who writes a paragraph without making even a single point...

e; Make your argument based upon semantics (clip vs mag), I'll make mine based upon reality. (Ask UB or Harrekin; I design UAVs that shoot heat seeking missiles, they know what's up)

Click to expand...

ummm where did I say it took 30 seconds to reload..try reading it again...

nothing easy about getting away from a crazy shooting with unlimited ammo.

londonfog said:

ummm where did I say it took 30 seconds to reload..try reading it again...

nothing easy about getting away from a crazy shooting with unlimited ammo.

Click to expand...

Nothing Easy about getting out of a school classroom with ONE exit when the shooter is blocking it while reloading for 3 seconds moron.

What are you gonna do, kick him? Then get shot. If they have any training, ANY, they will massacre a classroom; It's not even fair, which is why it is so disgusting.
How about I corner you with a MP7 and start reloading, you have a op, go for it, oh shit you're dead. That's what happens lol... You think "clip" matters when you are trapped, that's foolish, unless we talk 1-2r "clip", you are fucked

fb360 said:

e; Make your argument based upon semantics (clip vs mag), I'll make mine based upon reality. (Ask UB or Harrekin; I design UAVs that shoot heat seeking missiles, they know what's up)

Click to expand...

Dude reality is that a clip and a magazine are to different things. People who refer to a mag as a clip, need gun training. A clip is something that your ammo clips to or a strip or some device used to hold ammo. A magazine is something that you insert your ammo into and feeds your ammo into your weapon. If we were at a shooting range I would move away from you.

londonfog said:

every gun used in that school shooting was purchased legally, so we have to argue from the point of what guns can be purchased legally. .

Click to expand...

Every gun used in that school shooting was illegally obtained by theft.

Us vs Them:
I'm curious, if everything were to be equal in regards to weaponry, wouldn't our numbers alone dictate a win in our favour. It seems to me that most want the ability to not only kill the intruder but to make swiss cheese of them, it's not enough to take their lives but the want to literally shred the body to pieces runs rampant through most postings...is this due to a lack in skill?

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone specific, it's just an observation.

Although I understand weapons and have fired a few, I cannot comment on this issue directly due to the fact that I don't own a firearm and anything I would say is moot.

fb360 said:

Nothing Easy about getting out of a school classroom with ONE exit when the shooter is blocking it while reloading for 3 seconds moron.

What are you gonna do, kick him? Then get shot. If they have any training, ANY, they will massacre a classroom; It's not even fair, which is why it is so disgusting.
How about I corner you with a MP7 and start reloading, you have a op, go for it, oh shit you're dead. That's what happens lol... You think "clip" matters when you are trapped, that's foolish, unless we talk 1-2r "clip", you are fucked

Click to expand...

your writings tells me you know ZERO about firearms

Antidisestablishmentarian said:

Every gun used in that school shooting was illegally obtained by theft.

Click to expand...

lol...point made. but he did get it from his mother who made the purchases legally. Most guns used in a crime are stolen

londonfog said:

Dude reality is that a clip and a magazine are to different things. People who refer to a mag as a clip, need gun training. A clip is something that your ammo clips to or a strip or some device used to hold ammo. A magazine is something that you insert your ammo into and feeds your ammo into your weapon. If we were at a shooting range I would move away from you.

Click to expand...

Lol. Again, semantics bother you so much as to make an argument based upon it; lol again.

A clip is an oldskool term for a mag before there were large mags little dude. (my grandparents on both sides fought in both world wars; have stories.) We have mag's now because guns mainly went 20-30round "mags", which would fit into a metal piece which can be preloaded and inserted into the stock of a gun. Guns of old were mainly belt fed (all of them which were more than 5roud "clip", hence the "clip". But, semantics, which I already said.

What isn't semantics though, is my knowledge of warheads and UAVS/carriers, or my knowledge upon current warfare. Yours is severely

fb360 said:

Lol. Again, semantics bother you so much as to make an argument based upon it; lol again.

A clip is an oldskool term for a mag before there were large mags little dude. (my grandparents on both sides fought in both world wars; have stories.) We have mag's now because guns mainly went 20-30round "mags", which would fit into a metal piece which can be preloaded and inserted into the stock of a gun. Guns of old were mainly belt fed (all of them which were more than 5roud "clip", hence the "clip". But, semantics, which I already said.

What isn't semantics though, is my knowledge of warheads and UAVS/carriers, or my knowledge upon current warfare. Yours is severely

Click to expand...

save the bullshit for others . A clip and magazine are to different things. Nothing else to say after that FACT. Now take the knowledge I gave you and build on it.

londonfog said:

save the bullshit for others . A clip and magazine are to different things. Nothing else to say after that FACT. Now take the knowledge I gave you and build on it.

Click to expand...

LOL

I just skooled you in why I said clip, which is completely coherent, and you try run away a victor; LOL

Listen little man, I fully understand (even 12 hours ago) that a clip feeds a magazine. You are too stupid to realize that our old school guns didn't have metal magazines which fed them, but rather a belt, a "clip", you dumb fuck. Now shut the fuck up or try prove a point you can actually make, because you are failing miserably, you halfwitt'd buffoon.

I'll stick to making a point that continues an argument, instead of regressing it, clown.

fb360 said:

LOL

I just skooled you in why I said clip, which is completely coherent, and you try run away a victor; LOL

Listen little man, I fully understand (even 12 hours ago) that a clip feeds a magazine. You are too stupid to realize that our old school guns didn't have metal magazines which fed them, but rather a belt, a "clip", you dumb fuck. Now shut the fuck up or try prove a point you can actually make, because you are failing miserably, you halfwitt'd buffoon.

I'll stick to making a point that continues an argument, instead of regressing it, clown.

Click to expand...

again use the right terminology in a conversation or others will think you are full of it. I mean you did say you had knowledge on current warfare. Which means you should know when to use a clip vs a magazine. My point is simple this . A magazine and a clip are two different things. Don't be one of those fools who use the wrong term when discussing Gun Control

literally-

we're twenty minutes out of the stone age. already, we have those who feel we've progressed to the utopia where tragedy measured in thousandths of a percent are to be removed as the last vestiges of our former selves.

quite clearly the founders of this republic, felt that a restriction on wordplay culminating in loss or injury, was necessary. rightly so as seen in the next paragraph(Ammend.2).

then they go on to state that all. no matter who unsightly, or different than the opposition, were to have no impingement on their weapons. arms does not specifically cover just guns, imo. they did not feel, for some ood reason the need to limit the arms contingent upon injury or loss. it's almost as if they had implied, there WILL be injury and loss as pertains to said "arms", as it differs from their clear awareness of its existence in the first ammend., as it were.the only limitation is on the fed itself, stating "no infringement", as clear a statement as there could be.

they KNEW, of occultism(atheism/etc.ism, how they fooled buck!), western european imperialists, the church. they also knew of innovation and growth. Ben Franklin himself is credited with many discoveries. he knew guns would advance. and still, he thought the loss of life so little, he choose to arm every last citizen. all gun laws that infringe upon the second ammend. are illegal. our country was clearly founded on ideas opposite to arms control and regulation.

this is a scary, dangerous place. there are places more safe. take spain for instance. when the bomb goes off there, they all run for home. not AT the sounds of more blasts, in order to help their countrymen. then when all the dust has settled, they rally! not for there country, but to instill the perpetrator as king! so to ensure no more safety will be lost. residents of other countries could never understand the principles and feelings that us americans have. that is why they never left the service of the old master. australia? weren't you guys a british colony till last week?

these radical ideas of disarmament, and surveillance are NOT american ideas. therefore they are neither republican or democrat (as we define them). we need to wake up to the type of rational idiocy that guys like buck are spreading. it fits exactly with the limey, and the aussie. no offense intended.

America better keep its guns.

Given its the belligerent in most modern conflicts, they'll come for yous eventually.


On that day I'll drink whiskey and eat potatoes, thanking Yoda my country didnt feel the need to go around the world kicking hornets nests.