bush_cheney2004 Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 ....And it's mag, not clip They will never learn... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 And no surprise here: http://news.investors.com/business/011613-640850-sturm-ruger-smith-wesson-up-on-obama-gun-control.htm Shares of gun makers Sturm Ruger (RGR) and Smith & Wesson (SWHC) rose Wednesday after President Barack Obama unveiled his plan for decreasing gun violence, which includes banning assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. Sturm Ruger rose 5.6% to 50.70 in late afternoon trading. Through Tuesday's close, shares were unchanged since the school shooting on Dec. 14. They're up 24% in the last 12 months. Smith & Wesson stock rose 6.5% to 8.98. Shares are down 12% since the school shooting, but up 76% from a year ago. Like I said prior (in this thread?) Ruger would be the least effected based on their product line-up, long-term, if Obama’s anti-gun wet dream came true…….. Well done Obama. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 (edited) They will never learn... And they wonder why we don’t give the gun grabbers the time of day……..heard one of the talking heads the other day saying she wanted to see banned all guns that can shoot more then one bullet at a time Sorry gramps: Edited January 17, 2013 by Derek L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 If the Assault Weapons Ban needs a logo... Good Idea, but since it flew over everyone else's head, better explain to the young'uns that this is a real logo...not something you made up. But you have to be old enough to remember the Average White Band from the era of disco fever in the late 70's to get the reference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 Good Idea, but since it flew over everyone else's head, better explain to the young'uns that this is a real logo...not something you made up. But you have to be old enough to remember the Average White Band from the era of disco fever in the late 70's to get the reference. It was obvious, of course. AWB was more than just a Scottish disco band, with nice soul and funk tracks earlier in the decade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 It was obvious, of course. AWB was more than just a Scottish disco band, with nice soul and funk tracks earlier in the decade. Yeah, my Scottish father wouldn't allow disco in his house growing up..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 So I should be able to have my suitcase nuke, even though a small minority of society will abuse such devices. The problem is that there is no legitimate reason to have a suitcase nuke.Guns are a different story. In rural areas there is hunting. In urban areas, I do not think that criminals should know that they are the only armed people. There just aren't enough police. I'd rather some punk who wants to rob a helpless person have some risk that they'll be on the wrong end of a firefight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 The problem is that there is no legitimate reason to have a suitcase nuke. Guns are a different story. In rural areas there is hunting. In urban areas, I do not think that criminals should know that they are the only armed people. There just aren't enough police. But no one is taking guns away. Paranoid gun nuts keep saying that, but it is patently false. Sensible restrictions do not affect the 2nd amendment nor do they take away guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 But no one is taking guns away. Paranoid gun nuts keep saying that, but it is patently false. Sensible restrictions do not affect the 2nd amendment nor do they take away guns. And you keep saying that "sensible restrictions" will prevent school shootings such as this from happening, even though it's repeatedly been pointed out that Lanza broke several laws. Laws can't prevent people from breaking them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 And you keep saying that "sensible restrictions" will prevent school shootings such as this from happening, even though it's repeatedly been pointed out that Lanza broke several laws. Laws can't prevent people from breaking them. It does. Not in every case. And maybe not even in that particular case. But opposing sensible gun laws because it won't solve every problem (only some) is assinine. Let's oppose any gun restrictions because it won't prevent 100% of gun shooting deaths, only some deaths. That's defies reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 Anyone see yesterday's daily show? Steward made some great points about enforcing existing gun laws and how the ATF has been completely prohibited from doing so by random amendments snuck into spending bills over the last decade... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 But no one is taking guns away. Paranoid gun nuts keep saying that, but it is patently false. Sensible restrictions do not affect the 2nd amendment nor do they take away guns. You didn’t hear about the Obama administration proposed Assault Weapons Ban part II? He clearly wants to take away the ability to purchase new semi-auto rifles and shotguns…………In reality, it won’t happen, since he would never get it through Congress, and it’s highly unlikely he’d even get it through the Democratic Senate, but his stated intent is there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 (edited) Anyone see yesterday's daily show? Steward made some great points about enforcing existing gun laws and how the ATF has been completely prohibited from doing so by random amendments snuck into spending bills over the last decade... I don’t watch Stewart, but O’Reilly had some similar points, which I tend to agree with: From the other night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTX_mVqP_BM Edited January 18, 2013 by Derek L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 new semi-auto rifles and shotguns Cue the paranoid gun nut. Sensible restrictions means you can't get whatever gun that may happen to give you a boner. But you still can get many, many different kinds of guns! All sorts of them! Just not a few different kinds..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 Cue the paranoid gun nut. Sensible restrictions means you can't get whatever gun that may happen to give you a boner. But you still can get many, many different kinds of guns! All sorts of them! Just not a few different kinds..... Didn't you just say: But no one is taking guns away. Paranoid gun nuts keep saying that, but it is patently false. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/newspeak new·speak noun, often capitalized \ˈnü-ˌspēk,ˈnyü-\ : propagandistic language marked by euphemism, circumlocution, and the inversion of customary meanings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 (edited) Plenty of firearms are still available. No on needs 30 round magazines or assault weapons. Want a gun? Go get one! Can't get the one That turns you on? Boohoo. It doesnt mean it violates the 2 nd amendment. Edited January 18, 2013 by The_Squid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 It does. Not in every case. And maybe not even in that particular case. But opposing sensible gun laws because it won't solve every problem (only some) is assinine. Let's oppose any gun restrictions because it won't prevent 100% of gun shooting deaths, only some deaths. That's defies reason. The point is that there are gun laws. What "sensible gun laws" do you think are being opposed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 But no one is taking guns away. Paranoid gun nuts keep saying that, but it is patently false. Sensible restrictions do not affect the 2nd amendment nor do they take away guns. The attempt is to classify semi-automatics as assault weapons when they are not. If they can classify a certain firearm as an assault weapon, then they can restrict it without issue, so I expect the definition of what is classified as an assault weapon will be changed to encompass other firearms not previously classified as assault weapons. Full automatics are classified as assault weapons and seem to be heavily regulated in the US. Obama's plan seems to be restricting magazine size, and also going after the manufacturers themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 …In reality, it won’t happen, since he would never get it through Congress, and it’s highly unlikely he’d even get it through the Democratic Senate, but his stated intent is there. True....the Senate Majority Leader (Democrat Harry Reid) was re-elected in a close Nevada campaign partly on strong support from the NRA. Reid is a long time gun rights supporter. Advantage "gun nuts". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 The point is that there are gun laws. What "sensible gun laws" do you think are being opposed? The NRA gave Congressman of the year to the guy who made it so the ATF will never have a real head again. The NRA weakens existing laws because it is a terrible organization. It prevents gun research, it cheers on weakening of gun and their answer to every problem is more guns. The NRA is a big part of the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 Derek's a member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 The NRA gave Congressman of the year to the guy who made it so the ATF will never have a real head again. The NRA weakens existing laws because it is a terrible organization. It prevents gun research, it cheers on weakening of gun and their answer to every problem is more guns. The NRA is a big part of the problem. Well, that's your opinion of the NRA, which has nothing to do with my question: What "sensible gun laws" do you think are being opposed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 Well, that's your opinion of the NRA, which has nothing to do with my question: What "sensible gun laws" do you think are being opposed? I think sensible gun laws aren't being enforced because the NRA, the NRA's lobby and their lackeys have weakened the organizations that investigate and enforce them. Just like I said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 I think sensible gun laws aren't being enforced because the NRA, the NRA's lobby and their lackeys have weakened the organizations that investigate and enforce them. Just like I said. And I asked specifically, which sensible gun laws, specifically, aren't being enforced - and what proof do you have that they aren't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 (edited) Derek's a member. Derek you mean the guy who wants armed guards, not police but just some armed guy in schools? Yah I bet he is a member. http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2013/01/security_guard_leaves_gun_unat.html#incart_river Edited January 18, 2013 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.