Jump to content

Guns Guns Guns


NADman

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

The good guy will never show his concealed firearm, only the bad guy would.

when you live in Detroit , you definitely know all about guns , and yes you're right about the Glock 26 and 17 , but I prefer HK  or SIG , the Glock 26 is great to wear down in the shoe as a backup -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Ray_pierrewit said:

Petty criminals in all of our major cities are vying to "out-thug" one another and can easily purchase any manner of illegal guns from the U.S.A. 

And they will do it with machetes, viruses, trucks and more. IMHO, it's the peaceful society of accepting of anything. I am all for blaming the machete, hammer or truck, if removing them will stop crime...... and I am for all other law abiding humans to be able to protect ourselves, even if that includes more than one assailant.  No law abiding citizen, that I know about, is for criminal anything. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

Well after a few tries, you realize it may be cool, but at 60 cents a round, you find it stupid. Besides all Full Autos are illegal and only the ILLEGAL Gun Owners who do NOT register them have them to commit whatever their evil minds can come up with. Again, Trudeau is punishing the good guy and it won't make one damn bit of difference when someone want to commit murder. Bombs are much more effective or high speed vehicles too.

 

Though I don't agree with you that Trudeau's ban "won't make one damn bit of difference", we can agree that it certainly doesn't get to the heart of the problem... the romanticizing and borderline fetichism of guns and gun violence, which is, sadly, so pervasive in American culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 000 said:

when you live in Detroit , you definitely know all about guns , and yes you're right about the Glock 26 and 17 , but I prefer HK  or SIG , the Glock 26 is great to wear down in the shoe as a backup -

I grew up in Detroit, and my best friend is a retired cop. Yes he only fired his weapon twice in his whole career. All news is exaggerated, and movies are the worst in this regard.

Just now, Woofers and Tweeters said:

And they will do it with machetes, viruses, trucks and more. IMHO, it's the peaceful society of accepting of anything. I am all for blaming the machete, hammer or truck, if removing them will stop crime...... and I am for all other law abiding humans to be able to protect ourselves, even if that includes more than one assailant.  No law abiding citizen, that I know about, is for criminal anything. 

When England banned handguns, all the murders were done by Stabbers, but the murder rate actually went up.

1 minute ago, Ray_pierrewit said:

 

Though I don't agree with you that Trudeau's ban "won't make one damn bit of difference", we can agree that it certainly doesn't get to the heart of the problem... the romanticizing and borderline fetichism of guns and gun violence, which is, sadly, so pervasive in American culture.

Different country, different attitudes. Simple.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, sunburnwilly said:

Does anybody have a reasonable argument about why a private citizen should have a military style weapon ? Who uses an AK for hunting ? It's all about compensating for a shortcoming and of course FREEDOM .

I own a hand cannon and it vacations with me but otherwise it's strictly for home defense .

 

 

Define "military style weapon".  "Style"?  Really?  Detail the difference between your "military style weapon" and a Remington 7400, a gas operated, magazine fed, semi-automatic rifle that fires 7.62 NATO cartridges. 

 

It is legal to hunt big game with an AK-whatever in my state.  But you forget the sole reason for our Second Amendment is to ensure the citizenry has weapons on par with the military.   That way we can overthrow an opressive government, just like we did in the Revolution against the British.  No other justification is needed.  No other should be asked.  If you remember, the first battle at the Old North Bridge in Concord, MA was to prevent the British from confiscating powder and bullets to disarm the colonists, I.e. gun control.  Tyrants never give up that. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, billybob said:

Preferred method of hitmen.22 caliber with silencer. 

 

Most of the sound of a gunshot is the sonic boom as the bullet flies at supersonic speed.  Suppressors are meant to work in combination with special subsonic ammunition, and then the sound of the shot is reduced.  The thing about that ammunition is it’s not great for anything other than situations where the shooter doesn’t want to be heard.  This could be the case of shooting clubs that don’t want to disturb their neighbours, but that’s absout the only logical legal use.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, sunburnwilly said:

Meh I own a handgun so perhaps I'm part of the problem . But high capacity magazines in something that only exists only to MURDER people is reprehensible .

I disagree. The idea is not to die, and perps rarely work alone. Statistically, you will never need to shoot anyone, nor would I ever unless my life was in danger or I had no other choice. But the chances of ever having to do that is about the same as being hit by lighting while being bitten by a shark.....................but for women and old men, we are the prey of Criminal youth and it is a great equalizer, especially since no one EVER talks about the lives that are SAVED by just brandishing a gun and the crime never happens because of it.

 

The CDC and FBI estimate that, every year, between 500,000 to 2,000,000 crimes like rape, murder, and robbery do NOT occur because a potential victim brandished a gun and the potential perp ran off. It's only an estimate because there is never a police report unless someone is actually shot.

 

 

"More Guns, Less Crime" is a real statistic that the Media and Politicians ignore and rely on the Ignorant Sheeple when they Blab their BS about guns. This "discussion" was settled in 1791 and there is no need for further discussion.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ClaudeJ1 said:
2 minutes ago, Woofers and Tweeters said:

And they will do it with machetes, viruses, trucks and more. IMHO, it's the peaceful society of accepting of anything. I am all for blaming the machete, hammer or truck, if removing them will stop crime...... and I am for all other law abiding humans to be able to protect ourselves, even if that includes more than one assailant.  No law abiding citizen, that I know about, is for criminal anything. 

When England banned handguns, all the murders were done by Stabbers, but the murder rate actually went up.

If one who sought harm to someone else, and knew that the chances were favorable, ....

 

For a 50, 60, 70 year old to try to defend against three 20 something yo? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

I grew up in Detroit, and my best friend is a retired cop. Yes he only fired his weapon twice in his whole career. All news is exaggerated, and movies are the worst in this regard.

 

very good --------we have quite a few things in common -  Salut

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Islander said:

 

Most of the sound of a gunshot is the sonic boom as the bullet flies at supersonic speed.  Suppressors are meant to work in combination with special subsonic ammunition, and then the sound of the shot is reduced.  The thing about that ammunition is it’s not great for anything other than situations where the shooter doesn’t want to be heard.  This could be the case of shooting clubs that don’t want to disturb their neighbours, but that’s absout the only logical legal use.

I disagree, maybe a guy wants to shoot subsonic ammo outdoors and not wear any "ears" or disturb neighbors. I have a friend whose property includes a big hemispherical indentation of about 30 feet diameter left by a meteorite long before he owned the property. It's close to a major freeway, but isolated enough so he just tells his neighbors when he's out practicing. No one cares. He makes his own suppresors for that reason. He will never shoot anyone, guaranteed. Although he did shoot  a few critters with his little foldable rifle just for that purpose, but it's still frikin' loud with the suppressor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Woofers and Tweeters said:

And they will do it with machetes, viruses, trucks and more. IMHO, it's the peaceful society of accepting of anything. I am all for blaming the machete, hammer or truck, if removing them will stop crime...... and I am for all other law abiding humans to be able to protect ourselves, even if that includes more than one assailant.  No law abiding citizen, that I know about, is for criminal anything. 

you are very right -----

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

 

"More Guns, Less Crime" is a real statistic that the Media and Politicians ignore and rely on the Ignorant Sheeple when they Blab their BS about guns. This "discussion" was settled in 1791 and there is no need for further discussion.

We have more guns than people . Mass shootings shouldn't take away from your freedom but . I applaud Canada for doing something we should have done almost 40 years ago !

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...