• Amused
  • Angry
  • Annoyed
  • Awesome
  • Bemused
  • Cool
  • Crazy
  • Crying
  • Depressed
  • Down
  • Embarrassed
  • Enraged
  • Friendly
  • Geeky
  • Grumpy
  • Happy
  • Hungry
  • Innocent
  • Meh
  • Piratey
  • Poorly
  • Sad
  • Secret
  • Shy
  • Sneaky
  • Tired
  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
    Results 1 to 10 of 19

    News Center - Thread: assault weapons ban

    1. #1
      jsimms435's Avatar
      jsimms435 is offline Expert Member
      Moderator
      Married
      Mood:
      Cool
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Posts
      3,592
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      8,184
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      17,866
      Level
      38
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      0.73%
      Rep Power
      489

      assault weapons ban

      this is an article in Time magainze written by Bill Clinton

      "In one weekend, 31 people were murdered and dozens more injured in two mass shootings just hours apart in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio. The death toll may still grow. The shooters killed the young and old, men and women. In El Paso, the white-nationalist shooter’s intent was to claim as many Latino lives as possible. In both cities, the victims had their tomorrows taken or their futures forever altered by domestic terrorists as they shopped or enjoyed an evening out–everyday activities we all expect to pursue in safety. And in both cases, the gunmen used military-style assault weapons that were purchased legally.

      America is reacting as we have come to expect in the wake of mass shootings. Thoughts and prayers are offered, as they should be. Communities come together, as they should, in vigils to remember those lost and injured and to remind ourselves that we shouldn’t keep letting this happen. Elected officials speak about the need for change. But the tragedies do keep happening, while the one thing that we know can reduce the number and the death tolls of mass shootings has not been done: reinstituting the ban on assault weapons and the limit on high-capacity magazines that was in effect from 1994 to 2004."

      rest of article here
      https://time.com/5647319/bill-clinto...eapons-column/

      Your thoughts on putting another ban like this in place? What about all the weapons already available and on the streets?

    2. #2
      MennoSota's Avatar
      MennoSota is offline Bronze Member
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      6,776
      CH Cash
      28,481
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      24,043
      Level
      42
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      89.45%
      Rep Power
      563
      Fertilizer and deisel fuel destroyed an entire Federal building and killed hundreds of lives.
      Evil people, bent on evil actions, will do evil things. And...if God has chosen not to stop it, it will happen.
      That being said, I see no practical reason to have a gun that shoots more than 5 bullets. If I am a conscientious hunter, I won't pull the trigger on my prey until I know I have a shot that will kill the animal I am hunting. But, an unexpected turn may mean I miss the kill on shot one. For the sake of the animal I may need another shot. There is no need to have more than 5 bullets in the clip.
      As for the "assault rifle" the gun is light and has little recoil. It is a very good rifle for a hunter who might struggle to carry and use a heavy rifle with a big kick. Women and children find the newer rifles easier to shoot. Since we are rapidly losing hunters and the deer population is swelling (as well as far too many geese), we need more conscientious hunters. Allow them guns that they can handle...but...we only need 5 shots.
      Finally, since regulating guns seems so hard...why not regulate ammunition and the sale of shells. Reduce and regulate the amount of ammo and you reduce rounds available.

    3. #3
      tango's Avatar
      tango is offline Bronze Member
      Valued Contributor
      Married
      ... and you shall live ...
       
      Mood:
      Bemused
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Location
      Elsewhere
      Posts
      7,837
      CH Cash
      4,696
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (17,294,665 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      34,725
      Level
      49
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      65.1%
      Rep Power
      854
      It's back to the same tired notion that apparently a majority support something that is ill-defined and unlikely to be effective.

      There are already so many AR-15 style rifles out there that it would be all but impossible to recall them all. Even if an up-to-date database existed of everyone who has ever acquired one (and if there is it will be of limited use since it will mostly cover lawful gun owners), you can be sure that at the first sign of a recall people will report their weapons lost in boating accidents or similar.

      There's also the inconvenient truth that rifles account for a fairly small percentage of homicides and, of those, AR-15 style rifles account for an even smaller percentage. Not to mention the stupidity of endlessly trying to solve a problem by going after the people who didn't do it. You might as well label vehicles like the Ford F-150 as "assault vehicles" and try to ban "vehicles like the F-150" because of a handful of cases of reckless driving involving them.
      "Do what thou will shall be the whole of the law" - Aleister Crowley

      "If you love me, obey my commandments" - Jesus Christ

      The Bible comes as a complete package. If we want to pluck verses out of context so make them mean what we want them to mean, if we want to ignore the passages that are inconvenient to our outlook, we should be intellectually honest enough to throw our Bibles in the trash and admit we are following Crowley and not Christ.

    4. #4
      Forgiven1's Avatar
      Forgiven1 is offline Apprentice Member
      Married
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Location
      Texas
      Posts
      139
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      345
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      1,837
      Level
      14
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      30.71%
      Rep Power
      73
      There were more murdered that weekend in Chicago than in the two mass shootings combined. Guess what? Chicago and Illinois have some of the strictest gun laws in the country. How are those working for them?

    5. Likes Michael, Lämmchen liked this post
    6. #5
      tango's Avatar
      tango is offline Bronze Member
      Valued Contributor
      Married
      ... and you shall live ...
       
      Mood:
      Bemused
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Location
      Elsewhere
      Posts
      7,837
      CH Cash
      4,696
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (17,294,665 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      34,725
      Level
      49
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      65.1%
      Rep Power
      854
      Quote Originally Posted by MennoSota View Post
      Fertilizer and deisel fuel destroyed an entire Federal building and killed hundreds of lives.
      Evil people, bent on evil actions, will do evil things. And...if God has chosen not to stop it, it will happen.
      That being said, I see no practical reason to have a gun that shoots more than 5 bullets. If I am a conscientious hunter, I won't pull the trigger on my prey until I know I have a shot that will kill the animal I am hunting. But, an unexpected turn may mean I miss the kill on shot one. For the sake of the animal I may need another shot. There is no need to have more than 5 bullets in the clip.
      As for the "assault rifle" the gun is light and has little recoil. It is a very good rifle for a hunter who might struggle to carry and use a heavy rifle with a big kick. Women and children find the newer rifles easier to shoot. Since we are rapidly losing hunters and the deer population is swelling (as well as far too many geese), we need more conscientious hunters. Allow them guns that they can handle...but...we only need 5 shots.
      Finally, since regulating guns seems so hard...why not regulate ammunition and the sale of shells. Reduce and regulate the amount of ammo and you reduce rounds available.
      Very true that bad people will find a way to do bad things.

      The trouble with the thinking about hunting is that it misses the point entirely. The 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting. If you're keeping a firearm for self-defense (or home defense) you need something that will dispatch the bad guys, who may be plural. You're also talking about a situation where you might need a second (or a third, or more, depending on the situation) to stop one individual attacker. Since you're going to be under a huge amount of stress you're going to need extra ammo in case your first shot misses (or if you decide to fire a warning shot).

      Regulating ammo simply creates the same kind of problem that you get in places like NY, where the rich and powerful can have firearms and the riff-raff can't.

      Personally I would start with the basic concept of the right to life. A right is worthless without the freedom to defend the right from people who would try to take it from us. Therefore, if I have the right to life, I must also have the freedom to protect my life from anyone who might harm me. If the danger to my life is coming from six guys with baseball bats, I must be able to defend myself with something that gives me at least a fighting chance. One man against six guys half my age with baseball bats is a pretty uneven fight and about the only thing that will level the scale is a firearm, and I'm going to need more than 5 bullets in it.
      "Do what thou will shall be the whole of the law" - Aleister Crowley

      "If you love me, obey my commandments" - Jesus Christ

      The Bible comes as a complete package. If we want to pluck verses out of context so make them mean what we want them to mean, if we want to ignore the passages that are inconvenient to our outlook, we should be intellectually honest enough to throw our Bibles in the trash and admit we are following Crowley and not Christ.

    7. #6
      tango's Avatar
      tango is offline Bronze Member
      Valued Contributor
      Married
      ... and you shall live ...
       
      Mood:
      Bemused
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Location
      Elsewhere
      Posts
      7,837
      CH Cash
      4,696
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (17,294,665 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      34,725
      Level
      49
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      65.1%
      Rep Power
      854
      Quote Originally Posted by Forgiven1 View Post
      There were more murdered that weekend in Chicago than in the two mass shootings combined. Guess what? Chicago and Illinois have some of the strictest gun laws in the country. How are those working for them?
      If the laws don't work it is obvious that what we need is more laws that won't work either. Apparently.
      "Do what thou will shall be the whole of the law" - Aleister Crowley

      "If you love me, obey my commandments" - Jesus Christ

      The Bible comes as a complete package. If we want to pluck verses out of context so make them mean what we want them to mean, if we want to ignore the passages that are inconvenient to our outlook, we should be intellectually honest enough to throw our Bibles in the trash and admit we are following Crowley and not Christ.

    8. Likes Forgiven1 liked this post
    9. #7
      Bluezone777's Avatar
      Bluezone777 is offline Participant Member
      36
      Single
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2019
      Location
      SW Florida
      Posts
      17
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      89
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      1,272
      Level
      12
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      17.27%
      Rep Power
      49
      The second amendment isn't about self defense either at least not from the thief or the criminal. It's the right to defend oneself from one's own government if they should ever decide to become tyrants. One mistake people make is they read these amendments from the perspective of a 21st century person when in fact they need to be read from the perspective from a 18th century person. That is the amendment's initial audience and was written with them in mind as to how it was conveyed. These were a people who just toppled a tyrannical government and won their freedom and the first thing they ensured was that the people would have the right to defend itself from its own government. It's rather telling that the amendment giving men the right to bare arms immediately follows the 1st amendment. I figure it as the main goal of government should be to ensure that people are free to express themselves without undue influence of the government and the second amendment's purpose is for this people to be able to defend themselves from anyone who would try to steal away the first amendment. If the second falls, the first will fall next and with it go all your freedoms.

      The real problem is that America as a whole insists on remaining godless and as long as it does, things will only become worse. The day this nation of ours repents is the day things begin to turn around for the better. These shootings are but one of the many rotten fruits associated with a godless country that has turned its back on God and insists on being disobedient to His Word.

    10. Likes Lämmchen liked this post
    11. #8
      Josiah's Avatar
      Josiah is offline Bronze Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      8,444
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      120,183
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      85,876
      Level
      69
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      79%
      Rep Power
      992
      Quote Originally Posted by tango View Post
      It's back to the same tired notion that apparently a majority support something that is ill-defined and unlikely to be effective.

      There are already so many AR-15 style rifles out there that it would be all but impossible to recall them all. Even if an up-to-date database existed of everyone who has ever acquired one (and if there is it will be of limited use since it will mostly cover lawful gun owners), you can be sure that at the first sign of a recall people will report their weapons lost in boating accidents or similar.

      There's also the inconvenient truth that rifles account for a fairly small percentage of homicides and, of those, AR-15 style rifles account for an even smaller percentage. Not to mention the stupidity of endlessly trying to solve a problem by going after the people who didn't do it. You might as well label vehicles like the Ford F-150 as "assault vehicles" and try to ban "vehicles like the F-150" because of a handful of cases of reckless driving involving them.

      On target


      Liberalism is entirely about FEELINGS, emotions..... They like to do something that Mr. Roger's would do, for the reason he'd do it, so that we FEEL better. Never mind that it would accomplish nothing.


      On a related note, last week we had a mass stabbing. Several killed by a man with a knife. Interestingly, it got nearly zero attention from the press and NO calls for anything.
      We are justified by works - just not our own.

    12. #9
      Josiah's Avatar
      Josiah is offline Bronze Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      8,444
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      120,183
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      85,876
      Level
      69
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      79%
      Rep Power
      992
      Quote Originally Posted by Bluezone777 View Post
      The second amendment isn't about self defense either at least not from the thief or the criminal. It's the right to defend oneself from one's own government if they should ever decide to become tyrants. One mistake people make is they read these amendments from the perspective of a 21st century person when in fact they need to be read from the perspective from a 18th century person. That is the amendment's initial audience and was written with them in mind as to how it was conveyed. These were a people who just toppled a tyrannical government and won their freedom and the first thing they ensured was that the people would have the right to defend itself from its own government. It's rather telling that the amendment giving men the right to bare arms immediately follows the 1st amendment. I figure it as the main goal of government should be to ensure that people are free to express themselves without undue influence of the government and the second amendment's purpose is for this people to be able to defend themselves from anyone who would try to steal away the first amendment. If the second falls, the first will fall next and with it go all your freedoms.

      The real problem is that America as a whole insists on remaining godless and as long as it does, things will only become worse. The day this nation of ours repents is the day things begin to turn around for the better. These shootings are but one of the many rotten fruits associated with a godless country that has turned its back on God and insists on being disobedient to His Word.

      Yup. At least that's what my Early American History class prof taught..... The American Revolution was POSSIBLE only because every American male over the age of 10 had a gun - and could use it (well). The first thing any dictator does is try to eliminate guns in the hands of the people. You'd think this would be in vain in this modern world, but consider the Cuban revolution or the Hungry Rebellion, even now... The Second Amendment was not about hunting or self - defense or sport (although those were the uses for all those guns, once a UNIVERSAL American possession), the reason was a "check" on government, part of the whole "checks and balances" mentality of our founding, part of the whole "Government is something to fear" mentality that is quite a (unique) aspect of our nation.



      .
      We are justified by works - just not our own.

    13. #10
      MennoSota's Avatar
      MennoSota is offline Bronze Member
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      6,776
      CH Cash
      28,481
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      24,043
      Level
      42
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      89.45%
      Rep Power
      563
      Quote Originally Posted by tango View Post
      Very true that bad people will find a way to do bad things.

      The trouble with the thinking about hunting is that it misses the point entirely. The 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting. If you're keeping a firearm for self-defense (or home defense) you need something that will dispatch the bad guys, who may be plural. You're also talking about a situation where you might need a second (or a third, or more, depending on the situation) to stop one individual attacker. Since you're going to be under a huge amount of stress you're going to need extra ammo in case your first shot misses (or if you decide to fire a warning shot).

      Regulating ammo simply creates the same kind of problem that you get in places like NY, where the rich and powerful can have firearms and the riff-raff can't.

      Personally I would start with the basic concept of the right to life. A right is worthless without the freedom to defend the right from people who would try to take it from us. Therefore, if I have the right to life, I must also have the freedom to protect my life from anyone who might harm me. If the danger to my life is coming from six guys with baseball bats, I must be able to defend myself with something that gives me at least a fighting chance. One man against six guys half my age with baseball bats is a pretty uneven fight and about the only thing that will level the scale is a firearm, and I'm going to need more than 5 bullets in it.
      As a Christian I know my days are numbered by God and God alone. I know that God ordains the situations that occur every moment of my life. I find no reason to fear "bad guys" for indeed, we are all "bad guys."
      I do not think we are interpreting the 2nd Amendment correctly.
      A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
      The second amendment gives the right to have a well regulated militia which can keep and bear arms. It does not say a well armed individual has the right to bear arms.
      In other words, the 2nd Amendment gives the States the right to have an armory in which the regulated militia of individual citizens (brought together to fight) will acquire the weapons to defend the homeland.
      The key is well regulated militia.
      Unfortunately, the first phrase is ignored and thus interpreted that unregulated individuals have the right to freely acquire weapons. Such an interpretation has allowed citizens to stockpile weapons for their own kingdom rather than to defend the homeland. It actually goes against the intent of the founders.

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •