Unlimited "Guns, Fuck Yeah!" Thread

[The Good Reverend Roger]

perhaps tp was referring to your comment that it would "take you a few more minutes to fill that hay bale .. full of lead".
since the AWB still allowed for standard capacity mags (and thus no additional reload time), your statement would seem to imply the increased rate of fire that an automatic would have is what you meant.

incidentally, the numbers indicate that there are *way* less hits with a given amount of ammo when using fully automatic fire.
it's those semi-automatics, with their inherent 'assault-aiming', that is so deadly.
what we need to do is require fully automatic weapons be the standard.
y'know...for the children.

You just don't understand.  Assault rifles are magickle death devices that "mow down 20 children with a single pull of the trigger", and if we'd just outlaw them, there'd be no more murders, male-pattern baldness, or heartbreak of psoriasis.

TGRR,
Arguing the RWHN Way™.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

17 pages to go, jackasses!  RWHN needs a pony!

[AFK]

perhaps tp was referring to your comment that it would "take you a few more minutes to fill that hay bale .. full of lead".
since the AWB still allowed for standard capacity mags* (and thus no additional reload time), your statement would seem to imply the increased rate of fire that an automatic would have is what you meant.

incidentally, the numbers indicate that there are *way* less hits with a given amount of ammo when using fully automatic fire.
it's those semi-automatics, with their inherent 'assault-aiming', that is so deadly.
what we need to do is require fully automatic weapons be the standard.
y'know...for the children.

ETA:*grandfathered, that is.

The capacity of mags is one of the possible gun control strategies being discussed now, which is why I made that comment.

[trippinprincezz13]

perhaps tp was referring to your comment that it would "take you a few more minutes to fill that hay bale .. full of lead".
since the AWB still allowed for standard capacity mags (and thus no additional reload time), your statement would seem to imply the increased rate of fire that an automatic would have is what you meant.

incidentally, the numbers indicate that there are *way* less hits with a given amount of ammo when using fully automatic fire.
it's those semi-automatics, with their inherent 'assault-aiming', that is so deadly.
what we need to do is require fully automatic weapons be the standard.
y'know...for the children.

You just don't understand.  Assault rifles are magickle death devices that "mow down 20 children with a single pull of the trigger", and if we'd just outlaw them, there'd be no more murders, male-pattern baldness, or heartbreak of psoriasis.

TGRR,
Arguing the RWHN Way™.

Both of these. Particularly the fact that RWHN kept referring how assault rifles can kill everything in 5 seconds, though IIRC the bolded was a direct quote.

And what does the name of a bill have to do with the fact that you think assault rifles = instant child death? Oh right, nothing. Way to not address the actual issue again!

[The Good Reverend Roger]

perhaps tp was referring to your comment that it would "take you a few more minutes to fill that hay bale .. full of lead".
since the AWB still allowed for standard capacity mags (and thus no additional reload time), your statement would seem to imply the increased rate of fire that an automatic would have is what you meant.

incidentally, the numbers indicate that there are *way* less hits with a given amount of ammo when using fully automatic fire.
it's those semi-automatics, with their inherent 'assault-aiming', that is so deadly.
what we need to do is require fully automatic weapons be the standard.
y'know...for the children.

You just don't understand.  Assault rifles are magickle death devices that "mow down 20 children with a single pull of the trigger", and if we'd just outlaw them, there'd be no more murders, male-pattern baldness, or heartbreak of psoriasis.

TGRR,
Arguing the RWHN Way™.

Both of these. Particularly the fact that RWHN kept referring how assault rifles can kill everything in 5 seconds, though IIRC the bolded was a direct quote.

And what does the name of a bill have to do with the fact that you think assault rifles = instant child death? Oh right, nothing. Way to not address the actual issue again!

The quote was from Ratatosk, but it pretty much sums up that entire side of the argument.

[Elder Iptuous]

that method is quite effective, as i have no desire to respond rationally! 

also,
>17 pages is baked in the cake.

however, i propose that the thread would be more interesting taking it at its' titles face value...

got your eye on any particular firearms these days, Roger?
all this talk about god given right to guns makes me think of Zardoz, and now i want a Webley Fosbery pistol so i can feel more authentic running around in a red loincloth...

[Don Coyote]

perhaps tp was referring to your comment that it would "take you a few more minutes to fill that hay bale .. full of lead".
since the AWB still allowed for standard capacity mags (and thus no additional reload time), your statement would seem to imply the increased rate of fire that an automatic would have is what you meant.

incidentally, the numbers indicate that there are *way* less hits with a given amount of ammo when using fully automatic fire.
it's those semi-automatics, with their inherent 'assault-aiming', that is so deadly.
what we need to do is require fully automatic weapons be the standard.
y'know...for the children.

You just don't understand.  Assault rifles are magickle death devices that "mow down 20 children with a single pull of the trigger", and if we'd just outlaw them, there'd be no more murders, male-pattern baldness, or heartbreak of psoriasis.

TGRR,
Arguing the RWHN Way™.

Both of these. Particularly the fact that RWHN kept referring how assault rifles can kill everything in 5 seconds, though IIRC the bolded was a direct quote.

And what does the name of a bill have to do with the fact that you think assault rifles = instant child death? Oh right, nothing. Way to not address the actual issue again!

It's because they are scary and hence easier to create legislature against which will then further along the road allow for MORE legislature against other firearms, but it is totally not setting up a slippery slope at all.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

got your eye on any particular firearms these days, Roger?

Looking at that Czech CZ .40  for my daughter.

[Don Coyote]

that method is quite effective, as i have no desire to respond rationally! 

also,
>17 pages is baked in the cake.

however, i propose that the thread would be more interesting taking it at its' titles face value...

got your eye on any particular firearms these days, Roger?
all this talk about god given right to guns makes me think of Zardoz, and now i want a Webley Fosbery pistol so i can feel more authentic running around in a red loincloth...

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Where is Glittersnatch these days? THIS THREAD NEEDS NIXON-SAN.

[Elder Iptuous]

got your eye on any particular firearms these days, Roger?

Looking at that Czech CZ .40  for my daughter.

i've never had a CZ, but i've always been impressed by them when i've shot my friend's. 
they make pistols as well as they make kolaches, and, along with the fact that my best friend was a czechxican, makes me want to visit that country. 

[Cain]

A bottle of beer is under $2 in most places there.

Including the good beers.

[trippinprincezz13]

perhaps tp was referring to your comment that it would "take you a few more minutes to fill that hay bale .. full of lead".
since the AWB still allowed for standard capacity mags (and thus no additional reload time), your statement would seem to imply the increased rate of fire that an automatic would have is what you meant.

incidentally, the numbers indicate that there are *way* less hits with a given amount of ammo when using fully automatic fire.
it's those semi-automatics, with their inherent 'assault-aiming', that is so deadly.
what we need to do is require fully automatic weapons be the standard.
y'know...for the children.

You just don't understand.  Assault rifles are magickle death devices that "mow down 20 children with a single pull of the trigger", and if we'd just outlaw them, there'd be no more murders, male-pattern baldness, or heartbreak of psoriasis.

TGRR,
Arguing the RWHN Way™.

Both of these. Particularly the fact that RWHN kept referring how assault rifles can kill everything in 5 seconds, though IIRC the bolded was a direct quote.

And what does the name of a bill have to do with the fact that you think assault rifles = instant child death? Oh right, nothing. Way to not address the actual issue again!

The quote was from Ratatosk, but it pretty much sums up that entire side of the argument.

Ahh ok, but yea, that's the general idea I was getting from his arguments with how quickly everyone will die because of assault weapons.

Besides, pulling facts out of your ass without actually verifying anything is how we're supposed to argue this right?

Also, given these startling statistics http://www.childdeathreview.org/nationalchildmortalitydata.htm I still vote that we ban motor vehicles, swimming pools, bath tubs, lakes, puddles, food, small objects, shoe laces, ropes, ties, cleaning chemicals, swimming, pillows, stuffed animals, real animals, bicycles, bags, and buckets because wrapping everything in bubble wrap is the only way to save the children! Except that we should probably ban bubble wrap, because they might suffocate if they get all caught up in it

[Bruno]

RWHN, how do you feel about mandatory minimum prison sentences for traffic violations, to save lives?

My modest proposal:

3 months in jail with no chance of parole for every 5mph over the speed limit
3 years in jail with no chance of parole for passing in a no passing zone
3 years in jail with no chance of parole for running a red light / stop sign

Also consider that my plan would decrease pollution and increase public health because people would start driving less, and walking more. It's a win-win situation.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Disregarding my natural inclination to believe in mind-control gimmicks and false flag attacks (and the American government's documented history with both of those things), I still have to wonder what banning a few (relatively) rare types of guns and magazines has to do with decreasing gun violence. Given that none of the recent mass shootings were carried out by anything that would be illegal under the new regulations, what exactly are we trying to accomplish?

Anyone who supports these measures also needs to disregard that making something illegal doesn't make it go away. Criminals tend to not give many shits what the lawman says is illegal -- they're peculiar that way.

So, say there is a person who is sane enough to hold public office without completely going crazy. This person has a more or less reasonable comprehension of actual statistics and events. This person looks at all the evidence that's readily available from the tragic shootings America has endured of late, and considers possible solutions to the problem. This person weighs the facts and the pros and the cons of every possible action, and finally arrives at a decision to outlaw guns that were not used to commit these crimes.

In that case, either the person is not as rational as originally supposed, or the person's goal is not the one he claims it is. Either way, what's really going on?

A question well asked.