What's new
Frozen in Carbonite

Welcome to FiC! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Gun Rights Thread

1. An assualt rifle is NOT hunting rifle even the know nothing politicians definition of an assualt rifle. While you can feasibly use a ar 15 to hunt and it probably wouldn't even be that bad at it it is not made with the sole purpose of hunting. There are plenty of guns that ARE made for that purpose though.

Name one.

2. There is not a city in this country that you cannot buy a homedefense shot gun or revolver and there is not a single group of any actual relevence pushing to change that.

Aside from the democrats in california. And a lot of the time "may issue" effectively becomes "never issue unless you bribe the sheriff". Until they get sued for racial discrimination anyway(minorities tend to be more poor, thus can't donate to the elections thus won't get guns at a higher rate than white people, despite having more need for them for self defence).

3. Sports marksmen ship falls under the etc etc etc part.

You realize that covers 80% of the people who own a gun right? The rest of the gun owners get it illegally.
 
Name one.



Aside from the democrats in california. And a lot of the time "may issue" effectively becomes "never issue unless you bribe the sheriff". Until they get sued for racial discrimination anyway(minorities tend to be more poor, thus can't donate to the elections thus won't get guns at a higher rate than white people, despite having more need for them for self defence).



You realize that covers 80% of the people who own a gun right? The rest of the gun owners get it illegally.
1. Cabelas armor xtreme tactical rifle (literally the first google result for hunting rifle)

2. Easily fixable failure in execution that in no way deligitimize the idea of guns given based on need.

3. I mean PROFESSIONAL sports marksmen. Something along the lines of "you have to attend x amount of shooting tournaments per year to keep your gun permit" of course hobby shooters wouldnt be included. Guns are NOT a toy to be played with and treating them as such can only lead to bad things.
 
1. Cabelas armor xtreme tactical rifle (literally the first google result for hunting rifle)

That's a case, ya dumbass.

2. Easily fixable failure in execution that in no way deligitimize the idea of guns given based on need.

How do you fix that?

3. I mean PROFESSIONAL sports marksmen. Something along the lines of "you have to attend x amount of shooting tournaments per year to keep your gun permit" of course hobby shooters wouldnt be included. Guns are NOT a toy to be played with and treating them as such can only lead to bad things.

Uh-hu, and I assume we should take swords, crossbows, and knives not made for cooking away from people for the same reason right?
 
That's a case, ya dumbass.



How do you fix that?



Uh-hu, and I assume we should take swords, crossbows, and knives not made for cooking away from people for the same reason right?
Is treating a sword a knife or knife as likely to get me killed if someone treats them like toy's?
 
Is treating a sword a knife or knife as likely to get me killed if someone treats them like toy's?

Yes actually, that could very well get you killed if someone treats a fucking sword like a toy. Even blunt swords are dangerous.
 
Yes actually, that could very well get you killed if someone treats a fucking sword like a toy. Even blunt swords are dangerous.
Can vouch for this. Even when they aren't being treated as a toy. You can get hurt even training for stage combat.
 
Can vouch for this. Even when they aren't being treated as a toy. You can get hurt even training for stage combat.

And this isn't "bruising" hurt either, this is cracked bones, broken ligaments, and potentially brain damage.
 
And this isn't "bruising" hurt either, this is cracked bones, broken ligaments, and potentially brain damage.
In my case it's getting sliced open across my knuckles because I was a dipshit and tried a parry with a sword in my offhand when I'd only really practiced parries with the axe. (Very different. You hook the other weapon with the beard and pull it away)
 
In my case it's getting sliced open across my knuckles because I was a dipshit and tried a parry with a sword in my offhand when I'd only really practiced parries with the axe. (Very different. You hook the other weapon with the beard and pull it away)

That's hard in general, off hand sword parries are pretty challenging. I am impressed you can parry with an axe though.
 
That's hard in general, off hand sword parries are pretty challenging. I am impressed you can parry with an axe though.
Honestly, that's the whole point of the beard on an axe, to hook weapons or shields and manipulate them. I work with a Viking reenactor group. 10th century specifically.
 
Lol that's the entire point. The 2nd amendment had literally nothing to do with average civilian gun rights until the supreme court started ruling it did around the 1940s. Your entire basis for gun rights in america is centered around a revised factually incorrect ruling regarding the interpretation of the 2nd amendment made in the mid 1900s.
"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."

"The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both."

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."


"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."

"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."


There's more quotes from the founding fathers and their contemporaries online. Safe to say, you're incorrect. The 2nd amendment certainly was to oppose a congressional tyranny.
 
Yes actually, that could very well get you killed if someone treats a fucking sword like a toy. Even blunt swords are dangerous.
My mother wasn't nearly killed by the person next door because he had a sword and if the teenager who pointed a shotgun at her had been holding a kitchen knife it would not have been an in incident of note .
 
I do find it interesting how the right in the US is pro gun, when the right in Australia were the ones to ban it and this guy said this

marx_gun_control.jpg


:p
 
I do find it interesting how the right in the US is pro gun, when the right in Australia were the ones to ban it and this guy said this

marx_gun_control.jpg


I suggest that any such statements made before the modern "tacticool" rightwing militia bullshit be ignored because none of those folks cpuld have predicted the rise of the rightwing conspiracy bubble.

:p
 
My mother wasn't nearly killed by the person next door because he had a sword and if the teenager who pointed a shotgun at her had been holding a kitchen knife it would not have been an in incident of note .

1. Anecdotes are not data.
2. How about if it were a crossbow? I listed that too.
 
1. Anecdotes are not data.
2. How about if it were a crossbow? I listed that too.
Admittedly, crossbows share one important thing with the firearms of the Founder's era: there is no way to fire them a second time fast enough to keep the people around you from stopping you.
 
To have a A-10 Warthog to make mincemeat out of home invaders is a right that good americans should have.
I'll support that only if the government is willin to subsidize my fuel costs and create communal airstrips in all major cities.
 
Admittedly, crossbows share one important thing with the firearms of the Founder's era: there is no way to fire them a second time fast enough to keep the people around you from stopping you.

1. Pucket gun was around then.
2. Does not change the risk of this situation:

My mother wasn't nearly killed by the person next door because he had a sword and if the teenager who pointed a shotgun at her had been holding a kitchen knife it would not have been an in incident of note .

You only need to fire once for that.

3.
 
1. Pucket gun was around then.
2. Does not change the risk of this situation:



You only need to fire once for that.

3.

Umm... the puckle gun was never actually used on anyone ever, and may have only been two total guns ever produced. As well as being crew served and unreliable as fuck.
 
...
Do you ever read what your opponents say or do you just read what you think will let you "win" the debate?
 
...
Do you ever read what your opponents say or do you just read what you think will let you "win" the debate?
Do you? I mention my mother was nearly killed by someone fucking with a firearm in the house next door and you go and qoute me while bringing up repeating crossbows. And if you want someone to read anything you should probably click on reply or you know qoute them.
 
Back
Top Bottom