Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Show me this list of banned guns from the Clinton AWB "

Can you answer it? Yes or no?

NP here. You do not get to issue edicts that other people must follow. If you want information, try GOOGLE.

The point was that there was no list banning specific guns in the federal AWB. Anyone who claims there was is either uneducated, or lying

The irony here is rich.

Here's some trivia to illustrate (and underscore):
From when until when was the TEC-9 produced, and why was it discontinued?

Bonus question:
Where did the name for its successor, the AB-10, come from?

So you are claiming that the TEC9 was banned by name in the law, or are you just trying to twist things to fit your narrative?

Blame Obama all you want, but he's gone. Trump is in office now, time for him to step up and do something more than offering thoughts and prayers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Show me this list of banned guns from the Clinton AWB "

Can you answer it? Yes or no?

NP here. You do not get to issue edicts that other people must follow. If you want information, try GOOGLE.

The point was that there was no list banning specific guns in the federal AWB. Anyone who claims there was is either uneducated, or lying

The irony here is rich.

Here's some trivia to illustrate (and underscore):
From when until when was the TEC-9 produced, and why was it discontinued?

Bonus question:
Where did the name for its successor, the AB-10, come from?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s the most popular rifle in America and has been for years. It’s incredibly modular and customizable, has low recoil, handles lots of calibers (for hunting, home defense, competition shooting), is much easier to use than something like a shotgun (so good for disabled persons, such as a veteran I know who uses one to protect his home). But you’ve decided that they’re evil, or “machine guns,” or only used by “sucky hunters,” and have no legitimate purpose. So I’m not going to say anything else, because you have your opinion about them. So do the millions of normal Americans who own them.

Ps: they’re not going anywhere, so focus on something else.

Lets be real. This guy is not a real hunter. No real hunter needs this type of weapon.

Before the army started evaluating them, when they were first brought to market, they were done so as light weight varmint hunting rifles, and they are still incredibly popular among varmint and hog hunters.

Your ignorance, and the media's hype, does not change that

Not my ignorance. Again, no real hunter needs these types of guns. You probably play basketball with an extra wide hoop. These guns are for those who need extra help, I guess.

What about them provides this "extra help"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Show me this list of banned guns from the Clinton AWB "

Can you answer it? Yes or no?

NP here. You do not get to issue edicts that other people must follow. If you want information, try GOOGLE.

The point was that there was no list banning specific guns in the federal AWB. Anyone who claims there was is either uneducated, or lying

A complete and utter ban on guns is clearly what's in order. It's the only way to stop this. Look at how well it worked for heroin, cocaine, marijuana, and even alcohol in the not too distant past.

And once they're banned, it'll be easy to round them all up. Sure, some people say that rounding up 11 million illegals is impossible - but rounding up 400 million guns is going to be much simpler. And obviously the first people to turn them in will be the criminals and terrorists, so no law-abiding person will need a gun to protect themselves anymore.

If you found out that most DUIs are committed by people driving a Toyota Carmry, the obvious thing to do would be to ban the Camry - the most popular car in America. That would solve the problem of DUIs in a Camry. You'd just get more people committing DUIs in the Corolla (2nd most popular car). Or we could just ban driving while intoxi.. oh, nevermind.

I've been reading a lot of people who clearly know nothing about guns, hunting, or sport shooting telling people what guns they need for things like hunting, sport shooting, or self defense. Interesting. I also read up there somewhere that these shootings only started after the Clinton AWB ended. The victims of Columbine will surely be relieved.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't schools have armed security?
...Like the Museum of Natural History?

-we value mummies and stuffed birds more than we value our children's lives?

Fuk the Libs. Time to reprioritize.

Anonymous wrote:Why don't schools have armed security?
...Like the Museum of Natural History?

-we value mummies and stuffed birds more than we value our children's lives?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question - who really thinks having these types guns available to the general public is a good idea? Why are gun owners choosing these guns to take a stand? If you are a hunter or a sportsman, would you want one of these? If you do, you are a pretty sucky hunter is all I will say. What about if you want a gin for personal protection? Who the heck actually wants one of these?

Because the NRA wants to make money off their sales. So they do. This is the only correct answer.

OMG NRA BOOGEYMAN OMG!!

Funny thing about the NRA is that they aren't even in the top 20 for congressional donors.

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s the most popular rifle in America and has been for years. It’s incredibly modular and customizable, has low recoil, handles lots of calibers (for hunting, home defense, competition shooting), is much easier to use than something like a shotgun (so good for disabled persons, such as a veteran I know who uses one to protect his home). But you’ve decided that they’re evil, or “machine guns,” or only used by “sucky hunters,” and have no legitimate purpose. So I’m not going to say anything else, because you have your opinion about them. So do the millions of normal Americans who own them.

Ps: they’re not going anywhere, so focus on something else.

Lets be real. This guy is not a real hunter. No real hunter needs this type of weapon.

Before the army started evaluating them, when they were first brought to market, they were done so as light weight varmint hunting rifles, and they are still incredibly popular among varmint and hog hunters.

Your ignorance, and the media's hype, does not change that

Not my ignorance. Again, no real hunter needs these types of guns. You probably play basketball with an extra wide hoop. These guns are for those who need extra help, I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fact is, that both AR15's and AK47's were both readily available. So claiming that the AWB had anything time I with the lower mass shooting rates is just ignorant

^^^wouldn't trade in his guns in exchange for the life of one child.

So, you'd support banning all the other things in our homes which kill exponentially more kids every year, than AR15s Do?

If it saves just one child....right?

Please stop feeding this ignorant troll. He is obviously very angry and unpredictable, reminds me of the religious anti-abortion nuts that slaughter doctors.

^^^^^^
Wouldn't give up the dozens of things in their home which will kill many many children this year

cost vs. benefit. Benefit of AR-15 is extremely low. Cars kill more people but benefit society tremendously.

So you think that there is a point where your possessions become worth more than the life of a child?

Without cars millions of people in this country would perish because that is how food is distributed from farm to store to table.

I don't count my car as a "possession." I count it as a necessary tool for living. Until the zombie apocalypse, gun owners can't make the same claim.

The whole "cars are deadly too" argument ignores the fact that car safety is a lot more regulated than gun safety. And that the purpose of a car is not to kill people with it.

There are many things in homes which kill many children every year, not just cars


And the only regulation involved with purchasing a car is attached to the financing. It isn't more regulated, if you have the money you can buy any vehicle you like

FALSE. Your ignorance is amazing. Cars are regulated in dozens of ways that have nothing to do with financing. Seat belts is a simple example. Air bags, etc. So, the previous that car safety is far more regulated than gun safety. The bloody hands at the NRA refuse to support any gun safety measures, including trigger locks.

Obama was never known for being a hard worker

Obama could have worked a little harder to accomplish something.

Because George W. Bush let the Assault Weapons Ban, that the Republicans put in place after Reagan was shot, expire.

Why don't schools have armed security?
...Like the Museum of Natural History?