Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 56

Thread: Obama Administration to seek new Assault Weapons Ban

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    5,383

    Obama Administration to seek new Assault Weapons Ban

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1

    The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.

    "As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.

    Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.

    "I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S.

    Mexican government officials have complained that the availability of sophisticated guns from the United States have emboldened drug traffickers to fight over access routes into the U.S.

    A State Department travel warning issued Feb. 20, 2009, reflected government concerns about the violence.

    "Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades," the warning said. "Large firefights have taken place in many towns and cities across Mexico, but most recently in northern Mexico, including Tijuana, Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez."

    At the news conference today, Holder described his discussions with his Mexican counterpart about the recent spike in violence.

    "I met yesterday with Attorney General Medina Mora of Mexico, and we discussed the unprecedented levels of violence his country is facing because of their enforcement efforts," he said.

    Holder declined to offer any time frame for the reimplementation of the assault weapons ban, however.

    "It's something, as I said, that the president talked about during the campaign," he said. "There are obviously a number of things that are -- that have been taking up a substantial amount of his time, and so, I'm not sure exactly what the sequencing will be."

    In a brief interview with ABC News, Wayne LaPierre, president of the National Rifle Association, said, "I think there are a lot of Democrats on Capitol Hill cringing at Eric Holder's comments right now."

    During his confirmation hearing, Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee about other gun control measures the Obama administration may consider.

    "I think closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent, would be something that would be permitted under Heller," Holder said, referring to the Supreme Court ruling in Washington, D.C. v. Heller, which asserted the Second Amendment as an individual's right to own a weapon.

    The Assault Weapons Ban signed into law by President Clinton in 1994 banned 19 types of semi-automatic military-style guns and ammunition clips with more than 10 rounds.

    "A semi-automatic is a quintessential self-defense firearm owned by American citizens in this country," LaPierre said. "I think it is clearly covered under Heller and it's clearly, I think, protected by the Constitution."

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Vegas, bitches!!!
    Posts
    3,855
    Although I'm a supporter of the pres. This is one area I don't agree with him. While I don't see the need for assault weapons for hunting or home defense (I am an avid hunter and weapons collector), an all out ban on these weapons is a slippery slope when characterizing what is considered an assault weapon. Besides it would never pass either houses of congress. It would be political suicide for congress people who preside over large rural communities.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    5,383
    Quote Originally Posted by BgMc31 View Post
    Although I'm a supporter of the pres. This is one area I don't agree with him. While I don't see the need for assault weapons for hunting or home defense (I am an avid hunter and weapons collector), an all out ban on these weapons is a slippery slope when characterizing what is considered an assault weapon. Besides it would never pass either houses of congress. It would be political suicide for congress people who preside over large rural communities.
    The second amendment is not about hunting or home defense... The second amendment is about a final "check and balance" against a tyrannical, oppressive government.

    To put it bluntly, the Second Amendment is about killing people.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    T-MOS LIVES FOREVER/W GOD
    Posts
    9,329
    I am taking my gun and moving to mexico

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,541
    little by little stripping people's power. Giving the govt more power. WOOT

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    In the Gym, if i could
    Posts
    15,927
    Quote Originally Posted by gst528i View Post
    little by little stripping people's power. Giving the govt more power. WOOT

    just like england, seems to be working for them *rolls eyes
    The answer to your every question

    Rules

    A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted
    to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially
    one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.


    If you get scammed by an UGL listed on this board or by another member here, it's all part of the game and learning experience for you,
    we do not approve nor support any sources that may be listed on this site.
    I will not do source checks for you, the peer review from other members should be enough to help you make a decision on your quest. Buyer beware.
    Don't Let the Police kick your ass

  7. #7
    Score one for the criminals if they succeed.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    I'm sure the Mexican drug cartels will be completely shut down by an assault weapons ban. This whole thing about drug cartels and their military-version assault rifles is a smoke screen being used by politicos to further a liberal agenda. Banning assault weapons (of which I own several, and yes I would use them to defend my home and have been properly trained to do so) in the US isn't going to change the activities of the Mexican drug cartel's. They obviously don't give a flying fk about the laws set forth by Obama's or any other administration.

    Fking liberals.
    Last edited by Nooomoto; 03-02-2009 at 07:53 AM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    5,383
    I read about the Mexcian cartels and how they were using AUTOMATIC weapons and grenades... hmm funny, how the **** would a SEMIAUTO ban change that?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    T-MOS LIVES FOREVER/W GOD
    Posts
    9,329
    Quote Originally Posted by AandF6969 View Post
    I read about the Mexcian cartels and how they were using AUTOMATIC weapons and grenades... hmm funny, how the **** would a SEMIAUTO ban change that?
    A ban it not going to change anything...except for us,,,,the criminals with still get there you wont...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Front toward enemy
    Posts
    6,265
    Yes, because comparing America to the UK as some sort of modern day Russia seems to be the latest internet thing..

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    34,255
    I'd like to know who the citizens are in favor of more gun control. Sure there are some, but for some reason I highly doubt the majority. I don't think the American people are demanding these actions and laws for some reason. Anytime I hear arguments in favor of gun control, it's the politicians telling us we need stricter gun laws. I've yet to meet someone who's stated it as their reason for voting for a specific candidate. It seems to be what politicians in power want.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Kratos View Post
    I'd like to know who the citizens are in favor of more gun control. Sure there are some, but for some reason I highly doubt the majority. I don't think the American people are demanding these actions and laws for some reason. Anytime I hear arguments in favor of gun control, it's the politicians telling us we need stricter gun laws. I've yet to meet someone who's stated it as their reason for voting for a specific candidate. It seems to be what politicians in power want.
    I bet none of them live on the border to Mexico! Imagine having to deal with automatic weapon toting drug runners and enforcers, when you can't own a semi-auto assault rifle? I remember on the news a couple weeks ago hearing about a town in Arizona that had 400 kidnappings occur in 2008...400!

    Police are nifty and all, but they usually aren't there when you need them. They show up after everyone has been dropped, putz around the scene and put yellow tape every where. They also call press-conferences, which is immensely helpful.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    ShredVille
    Posts
    12,572
    Quote Originally Posted by Kratos View Post
    I'd like to know who the citizens are in favor of more gun control. Sure there are some, but for some reason I highly doubt the majority. I don't think the American people are demanding these actions and laws for some reason. Anytime I hear arguments in favor of gun control, it's the politicians telling us we need stricter gun laws. I've yet to meet someone who's stated it as their reason for voting for a specific candidate. It seems to be what politicians in power want.
    I will tell you who wants a ban on guns, they account for about 50% of our population.....WOMEN!!!

  15. #15
    amcon's Avatar
    amcon is offline physical pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside... The pain of quiting will lasts forever!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    in the freaking cold
    Posts
    3,846
    impeach now!!! save our country... if this law passes it will slowly allow for more and more amendments to it that will lead to the lack of guns to the general society ... watch for amo regualtions coming asap behind this!!!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    in dreamy land
    Posts
    33,788
    Quote Originally Posted by amcon View Post
    impeach now!!! save our country... if this law passes it will slowly allow for more and more amendments to it that will lead to the lack of guns to the general society ... watch for amo regualtions coming asap behind this!!!
    i AGREE.....although...i don't give a **** what he bans....my rights are my rights....and the weapons are ALOT cheaper black market anyway without all the fagass gov't taxes and such

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    the guns that use to be banned are typically not weapons that america's were buying anyways.. AR-15's and AK-47/AK-74 were not part of clintons ban..

    but i honestly believe this is all just talk, kinda like what EVERY administration does just to make it look like they are serious. thats why they down play a time frame...

    This is the same thing Bush did in 2004 about gay marriage, said he was going to put an end to it, he said he was going to push bills against it, then after he won all he said about gays and lesbians was wishing the best for his Vice-presidents lesbian daughter for have a baby that would be raised by her and her lesbian lover...

    ITS JUST POLITICAL BULL_SH*T DON'T LOOK SO DEEP INTO IT

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    5,383
    Quote Originally Posted by quarry206 View Post
    the guns that use to be banned are typically not weapons that america's were buying anyways.. AR-15's and AK-47/AK-74 were not part of clintons ban..
    AR15's and AK47's were most definitely part of the Clinton gun ban.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_Weapons_Ban

    "By former U.S. law the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, H&K G36E, TEC-9, all non-automatic AK-47s, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms "

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    In the Gym, if i could
    Posts
    15,927
    Quote Originally Posted by AandF6969 View Post
    AR15's and AK47's were most definitely part of the Clinton gun ban.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_Weapons_Ban

    "By former U.S. law the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, H&K G36E, TEC-9, all non-automatic AK-47s, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms "

    and the current one says "any weapon that needs a magazine"

    that pretty much covers 80% of weapons owned by Law abiding citizens
    The answer to your every question

    Rules

    A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted
    to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially
    one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.


    If you get scammed by an UGL listed on this board or by another member here, it's all part of the game and learning experience for you,
    we do not approve nor support any sources that may be listed on this site.
    I will not do source checks for you, the peer review from other members should be enough to help you make a decision on your quest. Buyer beware.
    Don't Let the Police kick your ass

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    Quote Originally Posted by spywizard View Post
    and the current one says "any weapon that needs a magazine"

    that pretty much covers 80% of weapons owned by Law abiding citizens
    which current one is that? this article is just about BS talk about maybe supporting a bill... If there is a bill out there i have never heard about it... and the if you are refering to HR-45 that is not a weapons ban, that bill would one only apply in states that don't have a system already, and does not ban, just puts restrictions on sell and movement... and that bill was introduced by senator rush during the last days of the bush term and has a very slim slim chance of every even coming to a vote.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

    * Folding or telescoping stock
    * Pistol grip
    * Bayonet mount
    * Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
    * Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

    those are the Clinton requirements for an Assault weapon..


    i personally bought both an AR-15 and an AK-47 in Florida in 2003 during the ban. legally without a class III permit... so what i didn't have a flash suppressor or bayonet mount, who cares... and please hear me out, i am totally against the ban, i am also against the taking away of any of our rights. but as long as we have the political system that we have it won't be changed.

    once again though people are ripping into the a side bar of what i sad.. the point still is the bill was past back then by both house of or congress, not just the president The point of what i wrote is every president has people in their cabinet that talk out of their ass in front of the media..I am just very against people putting blame on any political figures that have nothing directly to do with it. if we went throughout history and talked about every idea that was thrown on in a new conference and never put into action we could go on forever..

    crime will never be changed by the speed of ease of the ability to get a weapons!

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    5,383
    I do recall seeing on barackobama.com that he supports reinstating the Assault Weapon ban. That, and his heinous voting record regarding guns are what make me question anything that comes out of his mouth.

    While in IL, he voted to ban handguns, ban semi-autos, allow weapon confiscation in the event of a natural disaster... etc etc.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Vegas, bitches!!!
    Posts
    3,855
    Could someone point to a successful country with absolutely no gun control? Canada has it, Australia has it as well. Both countries restrict assault weapons as well. I point out those countries because when Obama won the presidency, those are the two countries I saw many of you wanting to run to.

    Then again there are countries with no gun control, Jamaica, Brazil, Mexico, Aghanistan, etc.

    I'm not trying to be funny or sarcastic. I just want to know what valid argument there is for no gun control. The simple argument of the 2nd admendment isn't good enough for me. Saying that, IMO, is akin to religious fanatic saying homosexuality is wrong simply because it says so in the bible. Ridiculous IMO.

    I bring this up because over the last couple days, there has been two heinous crimes gun crimes recently. One in Germany (who has the tightest gun control laws on the planet, I think), the other in Alabama who has a large gun ownership population. Not to mention the recent church shooting a couple days ago. I'm looking for solutions, there has got to be some type of effective middle ground on this. I don't think arming everyone will solve the problem, nor will taking all guns away from everybody will either.
    Last edited by BgMc31; 03-11-2009 at 01:26 PM.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    Quote Originally Posted by BgMc31 View Post

    I bring this up because over the last couple days, there has been two heinous crimes gun crimes recently. One in Germany (who has the tightest gun control laws on the planet, I think), the other in Alabama who has a large gun ownership population. Not to mention the recent church shooting a couple days ago. I'm looking for solutions, there has got to be some type of effective middle ground on this. I don't think arming everyone will solve the problem, nor will taking all guns away from everybody will either.
    Imagine if the victims in all of these crimes had guns to defend themselves against the criminals who obviously aren't too concerned with the laws of our society? Law enforcement obviously could not protect these people. When this is the case, which it is...it is up to you to defend yourself. How exactly do you plan to do that when someone (a criminal) uses a gun against you, and your hands are tied because you're a law abiding citizen that chooses to not own a weapon?

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Vegas, bitches!!!
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Nooomoto View Post
    Imagine if the victims in all of these crimes had guns to defend themselves against the criminals who obviously aren't too concerned with the laws of our society? Law enforcement obviously could not protect these people. When this is the case, which it is...it is up to you to defend yourself. How exactly do you plan to do that when someone (a criminal) uses a gun against you, and your hands are tied because you're a law abiding citizen that chooses to not own a weapon?
    All the victims in the Alabama shootings had guns in their homes. They just didn't/couldn't get to them. Do you expect to allow teenagers in school to carry guns (in the Germany incident)?

    The perpatrator of both crimes and the church killing were all legal registered gun owners. Clarification...the parents of the german school shooter was a registered gun owner.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Dar ad-Dawah
    Posts
    1,229
    Peace be unto you, BgMc.

    You're a Christian right? I'm a bit confused about this statement of yours:

    Quote Originally Posted by BgMc31 View Post
    Saying that, IMO, is akin to religious fanatic saying homosexuality is wrong simply because it says so in the bible. Ridiculous IMO.
    So it would be religious fanaticism to hold that homosexuality is wrong even though it is explicitly stated in the Bible that it is?

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Vegas, bitches!!!
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by BuffedGuy View Post
    Peace be unto you, BgMc.

    You're a Christian right? I'm a bit confused about this statement of yours:



    So it would be religious fanaticism to hold that homosexuality is wrong even though it is explicitly stated in the Bible that it is?
    I am a Christian, but I like to think of myself as a free thinking Christian. I don't believe in everything the bible teaches, but I agree with some principles that it teaches. The Bible in IMO, or any other holy book isn't the end all be all. It's a guideline to live your life. As a human being given free will by our creator, it is my choice to be able to agree and disagree with a book written by man. And until God, Allah, Buddah, or any other higher power tells me directly what is right or wrong, I am within my right to follow the teachings of man or not.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Dar ad-Dawah
    Posts
    1,229
    Peace be unto you, BgMc.

    First, I want to say that I enjoy your posts, and so apologies in advance if this comes across as confrontational at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by BgMc31 View Post
    I am a Christian, but I like to think of myself as a free thinking Christian. I don't believe in everything the bible teaches, but I agree with some principles that it teaches. The Bible in IMO, or any other holy book isn't the end all be all. It's a guideline to live your life. As a human being given free will by our creator, it is my choice to be able to agree and disagree with a book written by man. And until God, Allah, Buddah, or any other higher power tells me directly what is right or wrong, I am within my right to follow the teachings of man or not.
    My issue is with the underlined part above. Isn't the basis of religion that the holy book is either the direct word of God (as Muslims believe about the Quran) or at minimum inspired by God (as most Christians believe about the Bible)?

    Basically what you said in the underlined part is the way I feel about virtually any other book in the world. Give me a book written by say Bill O'reilly or Ron Paul or whoever, and I would agree with parts of it and disagree with other parts of it. I mean, what I am saying is: is this not reducing the authority of a holy book to that of any other book on earth?

    But I think the real issue I had with your post was not your view that homosexuality is ok: you are entitled to your view. My issue was with your categorization of anyone who holds homosexuality to be wrong to be a religious fanatic. And this is not really a question or comment but just an observation: it does seem that the Abrahamic faiths will have a tough time confronting this issue in the next generation or so when it seems like it will become politically and socially impossible to even cogitate the Biblical view towards homosexuality. Right now, we live in a time in which we can voice our views--although in a very courteous and cautious manner--but I feel like in a few generations time it will be something that will become socially taboo altogether, akin to attacking someone's race.

    I'm not really going anywhere with this: only pointing out an observation that I had. I really wonder how religion itself will fare in the generations to come. I don't think your view--that religion can be 'tweaked' to become more appropriate--is very sustainable. At most religion can then be a hobby, and as such, will die out in obscurity. I think that from a purely logical and mathematical approach, religion only makes sense from an all-or-none perspective...at least with regards to Christianity and Islam, which posit themselves as nothing short of absolute truths.
    Last edited by BuffedGuy; 03-11-2009 at 10:19 PM.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    1,623
    Police state here we go...

    Chris Rock shoulda been the first black president

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDC-XQG1ifo

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Dar ad-Dawah
    Posts
    1,229
    Quote Originally Posted by BgMc31 View Post
    I am a Christian, but I like to think of myself as a free thinking Christian. I don't believe in everything the bible teaches, but I agree with some principles that it teaches. The Bible in IMO, or any other holy book isn't the end all be all. It's a guideline to live your life. As a human being given free will by our creator, it is my choice to be able to agree and disagree with a book written by man. And until God, Allah, Buddah, or any other higher power tells me directly what is right or wrong, I am within my right to follow the teachings of man or not.
    Cool. I posted a response to this in my "Ask a Muslim" thread. Not so much a refutation, but just our view towards this. Since I'm the Jon Kerry of this website, expect it to be long-winded.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Plano, TX
    Posts
    518
    Quote Originally Posted by BgMc31 View Post
    Could someone point to a successful country with absolutely no gun control? Canada has it, Australia has it as well. Both countries restrict assault weapons as well. I point out those countries because when Obama won the presidency, those are the two countries I saw many of you wanting to run to.

    Then again there are countries with no gun control, Jamaica, Brazil, Mexico, Aghanistan, etc.

    I'm not trying to be funny or sarcastic. I just want to know what valid argument there is for no gun control. The simple argument of the 2nd admendment isn't good enough for me. Saying that, IMO, is akin to religious fanatic saying homosexuality is wrong simply because it says so in the bible. Ridiculous IMO.

    I bring this up because over the last couple days, there has been two heinous crimes gun crimes recently. One in Germany (who has the tightest gun control laws on the planet, I think), the other in Alabama who has a large gun ownership population. Not to mention the recent church shooting a couple days ago. I'm looking for solutions, there has got to be some type of effective middle ground on this. I don't think arming everyone will solve the problem, nor will taking all guns away from everybody will either.
    The fact that it's in our constitution isn't good enough for you? WTF are you smoking man!?

    EDIT: And the country you asked about is Switzerland. I wish I could live there.
    Last edited by mho; 04-22-2009 at 10:47 AM.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Vegas, bitches!!!
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by mho View Post
    The fact that it's in our constitution isn't good enough for you? WTF are you smoking man!?

    EDIT: And the country you asked about is Switzerland. I wish I could live there.
    Nope the fact that its in our constitution isn't good enough for me!!! And as of right now, I'm not smoking anything. Catch me post workout at about 10-11pm and I may be a little lifted from the chron!!! LOL!!! My issue isn't what about the wordage or interpretation of a document but with the safety and security of our country and it's citizens. Like I pointed out before, just because its in the constitution doesn't make it right. People put far too much trust in documents (Constitution, Bible, Torah, Quran, etc.) written hundreds and thousands of years ago, instead of thinking of what applies to this day and age.

    Anyway, Switzerland has extensive gun control laws too (some of the strictest in Europe), so please try again...

    http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-switzerland.htm


    BTW, like Obama, I'm not for the elimination of all guns. As a matter of fact I own several myself (including two assault rifles). But my job allows me to have those firearms and I had to licensed to carry those weapons. That's my point of contention. All you people who believe that someone is trying to take your guns away are being conned by these gun stores to buy more of their product. It's funny because you puppets follow that stuff without thinking for yourself. Because of a misguided belief that Obama is going to take guns away, we've seen the largest increase in gun purchasing in years. But there is nothing that would indicate he is going down that road. Many may argue against this, but I guarantee that in 4yrs, we will all still have our guns, and then another 4yrs after that. Again, more chicken little syndrome!!!
    Last edited by BgMc31; 04-22-2009 at 12:49 PM.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Plano, TX
    Posts
    518
    Quote Originally Posted by BgMc31 View Post
    Nope the fact that its in our constitution isn't good enough for me!!! And as of right now, I'm not smoking anything. Catch me post workout at about 10-11pm and I may be a little lifted from the chron!!! LOL!!! My issue isn't what about the wordage or interpretation of a document but with the safety and security of our country and it's citizens. Like I pointed out before, just because its in the constitution doesn't make it right. People put far too much trust in documents (Constitution, Bible, Torah, Quran, etc.) written hundreds and thousands of years ago, instead of thinking of what applies to this day and age.

    Anyway, Switzerland has extensive gun control laws too (some of the strictest in Europe), so please try again...

    http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-switzerland.htm


    BTW, like Obama, I'm not for the elimination of all guns. As a matter of fact I own several myself (including two assault rifles). But my job allows me to have those firearms and I had to licensed to carry those weapons. That's my point of contention. All you people who believe that someone is trying to take your guns away are being conned by these gun stores to buy more of their product. It's funny because you puppets follow that stuff without thinking for yourself. Because of a misguided belief that Obama is going to take guns away, we've seen the largest increase in gun purchasing in years. But there is nothing that would indicate he is going down that road. Many may argue against this, but I guarantee that in 4yrs, we will all still have our guns, and then another 4yrs after that. Again, more chicken little syndrome!!!
    Thank you for posting that academic source . I'll have my rebuttal when I get home

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    G.B.G
    Posts
    510

    Question

    I wish my country did not have any gun control, I would so
    post a youtube video shotting with my full automatic Glock

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Middle East
    Posts
    3,511
    Quote Originally Posted by BgMc31 View Post
    Anyway, Switzerland has extensive gun control laws too (some of the strictest in Europe), so please try again...

    http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-switzerland.htm


    BTW, like Obama, I'm not for the elimination of all guns. As a matter of fact I own several myself (including two assault rifles). But my job allows me to have those firearms and I had to licensed to carry those weapons. That's my point of contention. All you people who believe that someone is trying to take your guns away are being conned by these gun stores to buy more of their product. It's funny because you puppets follow that stuff without thinking for yourself. Because of a misguided belief that Obama is going to take guns away, we've seen the largest increase in gun purchasing in years. But there is nothing that would indicate he is going down that road. Many may argue against this, but I guarantee that in 4yrs, we will all still have our guns, and then another 4yrs after that. Again, more chicken little syndrome!!!

    Thank you for playing, please try again.


    INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST THE ILLICIT MANUFACTURING OF AND TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS, AMMUNITION, EXPLOSIVES, AND OTHER RELATED MATERIALS

    THE STATES PARTIES,

    AWARE of the urgent need to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials, due to the harmful effects of these activities on the security of each state and the region as a whole, endangering the well-being of peoples, their social and economic development, and their right to live in peace;

    CONCERNED by the increase, at the international level, in the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials and by the serious problems resulting therefrom;

    REAFFIRMING that States Parties give priority to preventing, combating, and eradicating the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials because of the links of such activities with drug trafficking, terrorism, transnational organized crime, and mercenary and other criminal activities;

    CONCERNED about the illicit manufacture of explosives from substances and articles that in and of themselves are not explosives--and that are not addressed by this Convention due to their other lawful uses--for activities related to drug trafficking, terrorism, transnational organized crime and mercenary and other criminal activities;

    CONSIDERING the urgent need for all states, and especially those states that produce, export, and import arms, to take the necessary measures to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;

    CONVINCED that combating the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials calls for international cooperation, exchange of information, and other appropriate measures at the national, regional, and international levels, and desiring to set a precedent for the international community in this regard;

    STRESSING the need, in peace processes and post-conflict situations, to achieve effective control of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials in order to prevent their entry into the illicit market;

    MINDFUL of the pertinent resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly on measures to eradicate the illicit transfer of conventional weapons and on the need for all states to guarantee their security, and of the efforts carried out in the framework of the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD);

    RECOGNIZING the importance of strengthening existing international law enforcement support mechanisms such as the International Weapons and Explosives Tracking System (IWETS) of the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;

    RECOGNIZING that international trade in firearms is particularly vulnerable to abuses by criminal elements and that a "know-your-customer" policy for dealers in, and producers, exporters, and importers of, firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials is crucial for combating this scourge;

    RECOGNIZING that states have developed different cultural and historical uses for firearms, and that the purpose of enhancing international cooperation to eradicate illicit transnational trafficking in firearms is not intended to discourage or diminish lawful leisure or recreational activities such as travel or tourism for sport shooting, hunting, and other forms of lawful ownership and use recognized by the States Parties;

    RECALLING that States Parties have their respective domestic laws and regulations in the areas of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials, and recognizing that this Convention does not commit States Parties to enact legislation or regulations pertaining to firearms ownership, possession, or trade of a wholly domestic character, and recognizing that States Parties will apply their respective laws and regulations in a manner consistent with this Convention;

    REAFFIRMING the principles of sovereignty, nonintervention, and the juridical equality of states,

    HAVE DECIDED TO ADOPT THIS INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST THE ILLICIT MANUFACTURING OF AND TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS, AMMUNITION, EXPLOSIVES, AND OTHER RELATED MATERIALS:

    Article I
    Definitions

    For the purposes of this Convention, the following definitions shall apply:

    1. "Illicit manufacturing": the manufacture or assembly of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials:

    a. from components or parts illicitly trafficked; or

    b. without a license from a competent governmental authority of the State Party where the manufacture or assembly takes place; or

    c. without marking the firearms that require marking at the time of manufacturing.

    2. "Illicit trafficking": the import, export, acquisition, sale, delivery, movement, or transfer of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials from or across the territory of one State Party to that of another State Party, if any one of the States Parties concerned does not authorize it.

    3. "Firearms":

    a. any barreled weapon which will or is designed to or may be readily converted to expel a bullet or projectile by the action of an explosive, except antique firearms manufactured before the 20th Century or their replicas; or

    b. any other weapon or destructive device such as any explosive, incendiary or gas bomb, grenade, rocket, rocket launcher, missile, missile system, or mine.

    4. "Ammunition": the complete round or its components, including cartridge cases, primers, propellant powder, bullets, or projectiles that are used in any firearm.

    5. "Explosives": any substance or article that is made, manufactured, or used to produce an explosion, detonation, or propulsive or pyrotechnic effect, except:

    a. substances and articles that are not in and of themselves explosive; or

    b. substances and articles listed in the Annex to this Convention.

    6. "Other related materials": any component, part, or replacement part of a firearm, or an accessory which can be attached to a firearm.

    7. "Controlled delivery": the technique of allowing illicit or suspect consignments of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials to pass out of, through, or into the territory of one or more states, with the knowledge and under the supervision of their competent authorities, with a view to identifying persons involved in the commission of offenses referred to in Article IV of this Convention.

    Article II
    Purpose

    The purpose of this Convention is:

    to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;

    to promote and facilitate cooperation and exchange of information and experience among States Parties to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

    Article III
    Sovereignty

    1. States Parties shall carry out the obligations under this Convention in a manner consistent with the principles of sovereign equality and territorial integrity of states and that of nonintervention in the domestic affairs of other states.

    2. A State Party shall not undertake in the territory of another State Party the exercise of jurisdiction and performance of functions which are exclusively reserved to the authorities of that other State Party by its domestic law.

    Article IV
    Legislative Measures

    1. States Parties that have not yet done so shall adopt the necessary legislative or other measures to establish as criminal offenses under their domestic law the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

    2. Subject to the respective constitutional principles and basic concepts of the legal systems of the States Parties, the criminal offenses established pursuant to the foregoing paragraph shall include participation in, association or conspiracy to commit, attempts to commit, and aiding, abetting, facilitating, and counseling the commission of said offenses.

    Article V
    Jurisdiction

    1. Each State Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention when the offense in question is committed in its territory.

    2. Each State Party may adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention when the offense is committed by one of its nationals or by a person who habitually resides in its territory.

    3. Each State Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention when the alleged criminal is present in its territory and it does not extradite such person to another country on the ground of the nationality of the alleged criminal.

    4. This Convention does not preclude the application of any other rule of criminal jurisdiction established by a State Party under its domestic law.

    Article VI
    Marking of Firearms

    1. For the purposes of identification and tracing of the firearms referred to in Article I.3.a, States Parties shall:

    a. require, at the time of manufacture, appropriate markings of the name of manufacturer, place of manufacture, and serial number;

    b. require appropriate markings on imported firearms permitting the identification of the importer's name and address; and

    c. require appropriate markings on any firearms confiscated or forfeited pursuant to Article VII.1 that are retained for official use.

    2. The firearms referred to in Article I.3.b should be marked appropriately at the time of manufacture, if possible.

    Article VII
    Confiscation or Forfeiture

    1. States Parties undertake to confiscate or forfeit firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials that have been illicitly manufactured or trafficked.

    2. States Parties shall adopt the necessary measures to ensure that all firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials seized, confiscated, or forfeited as the result of illicit manufacturing or trafficking do not fall into the hands of private individuals or businesses through auction, sale, or other disposal.

    Article VIII
    Security Measures

    States Parties, in an effort to eliminate loss or diversion, undertake to adopt the necessary measures to ensure the security of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials imported into, exported from, or in transit through their respective territories.

    Article IX
    Export, Import, and Transit Licenses or Authorizations

    1. States Parties shall establish or maintain an effective system of export, import, and international transit licenses or authorizations for transfers of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

    2. States Parties shall not permit the transit of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials until the receiving State Party issues the corresponding license or authorization.

    3. States Parties, before releasing shipments of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials for export, shall ensure that the importing and in-transit countries have issued the necessary licenses or authorizations.

    4. The importing State Party shall inform the exporting State Party, upon request, of the receipt of dispatched shipments of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

    Article X
    Strengthening of Controls at Export Points

    Each State Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to detect and prevent illicit trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials between its territory and that of other States Parties, by strengthening controls at export points.

    Article XI
    Recordkeeping

    States Parties shall assure the maintenance for a reasonable time of the information necessary to trace and identify illicitly manufactured and illicitly trafficked firearms to enable them to comply with their obligations under Articles XIII and XVII.

    Article XII
    Confidentiality

    Subject to the obligations imposed by their Constitutions or any international agreements, the States Parties shall guarantee the confidentiality of any information they receive, if requested to do so by the State Party providing the information. If for legal reasons such confidentiality cannot be maintained, the State Party that provided the information shall be notified prior to its disclosure.

    Article XIII
    Exchange of Information

    1. States Parties shall exchange among themselves, in conformity with their respective domestic laws and applicable treaties, relevant information on matters such as:

    a. authorized producers, dealers, importers, exporters, and, whenever possible, carriers of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;

    b. the means of concealment used in the illicit manufacturing of or trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials, and ways of detecting them;

    c. routes customarily used by criminal organizations engaged in illicit trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;

    d. legislative experiences, practices, and measures to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials; and

    e. techniques, practices, and legislation to combat money laundering related to illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

    2. States Parties shall provide to and share with each other, as appropriate, relevant scientific and technological information useful to law enforcement, so as to enhance one another's ability to prevent, detect, and investigate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials and prosecute those involved therein.

    3. States Parties shall cooperate in the tracing of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials which may have been illicitly manufactured or trafficked. Such cooperation shall include accurate and prompt responses to trace requests.

    Article XIV
    Cooperation

    1. States Parties shall cooperate at the bilateral, regional, and international levels to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

    2. States Parties shall identify a national body or a single point of contact to act as liaison among States Parties, as well as between them and the Consultative Committee established in Article XX, for purposes of cooperation and information exchange.

    Article XV
    Exchange of Experience and Training

    1. States Parties shall cooperate in formulating programs for the exchange of experience and training among competent officials, and shall provide each other assistance that would facilitate their respective access to equipment or technology proven to be effective for the implementation of this Convention.

    2. States Parties shall cooperate with each other and with competent international organizations, as appropriate, to ensure that there is adequate training of personnel in their territories to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials. The subject matters of such training shall include, inter alia:

    a. identification and tracing of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;

    b. intelligence gathering, especially that which relates to identification of illicit manufacturers and traffickers, methods of shipment, and means of concealment of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials; and

    c. improvement of the efficiency of personnel responsible for searching for and detecting, at conventional and nonconventional points of entry and exit, illicitly trafficked firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

    Article XVI
    Technical Assistance

    States Parties shall cooperate with each other and with relevant international organizations, as appropriate, so that States Parties that so request receive the technical assistance necessary to enhance their ability to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials, including technical assistance in those matters identified in Article XV.2.

    Article XVII
    Mutual Legal Assistance

    1. States Parties shall afford one another the widest measure of mutual legal assistance, in conformity with their domestic law and applicable treaties, by promptly and accurately processing and responding to requests from authorities which, in accordance with their domestic law, have the power to investigate or prosecute the illicit activities described in this Convention, in order to obtain evidence and take other necessary action to facilitate procedures and steps involved in such investigations or prosecutions.

    2. For purposes of mutual legal assistance under this article, each Party may designate a central authority or may rely upon such central authorities as are provided for in any relevant treaties or other agreements. The central authorities shall be responsible for making and receiving requests for mutual legal assistance under this article, and shall communicate directly with each other for the purposes of this article.

    Article XVIII
    Controlled Delivery

    1. Should their domestic legal systems so permit, States Parties shall take the necessary measures, within their possibilities, to allow for the appropriate use of controlled delivery at the international level, on the basis of agreements or arrangements mutually consented to, with a view to identifying persons involved in the offenses referred to in Article IV and to taking legal action against them.

    2. Decisions by States Parties to use controlled delivery shall be made on a case-by-case basis and may, when necessary, take into consideration financial arrangements and understandings with respect to the exercise of jurisdiction by the States Parties concerned.

    3. With the consent of the States Parties concerned, illicit consignments under controlled delivery may be intercepted and allowed to continue with the firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials intact or removed or replaced in whole or in part.

    Article XIX
    Extradition

    1. This article shall apply to the offenses referred to in Article IV of this Convention.

    2. Each of the offenses to which this article applies shall be deemed to be included as an extraditable offense in any extradition treaty in force between or among the States Parties. The States Parties undertake to include such offenses as extraditable offenses in every extradition treaty to be concluded between or among them.

    3. If a State Party that makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty receives a request for extradition from another State Party with which it does not have an extradition treaty, it may consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition with respect to any offense to which this article applies.

    4. States Parties that do not make extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty shall recognize offenses to which this article applies as extraditable offenses between themselves.

    5. Extradition shall be subject to the conditions provided for by the law of the Requested State or by applicable extradition treaties, including the grounds on which the Requested State may refuse extradition.

    6. If extradition for an offense to which this article applies is refused solely on the basis of the nationality of the person sought, the Requested State Party shall submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution under the criteria, laws, and procedures applied by the Requested State to those offenses when they are committed in its own territory. The Requested and Requesting States Parties may, in accordance with their domestic laws, agree otherwise in relation to any prosecution referred to in this paragraph.

    Article XX
    Establishment and Functions of the Consultative Committee

    1. In order to attain the objectives of this Convention, the States Parties shall establish a Consultative Committee responsible for:

    a. promoting the exchange of information contemplated under this Convention;

    b. facilitating the exchange of information on domestic legislation and administrative procedures of the States Parties;

    c. encouraging cooperation between national liaison authorities to detect suspected illicit exports and imports of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;

    d. promoting training and exchange of knowledge and experience among States Parties and technical assistance between States Parties and relevant international organizations, as well as academic studies;

    e. requesting from nonparty states, when appropriate, information on the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials; and

    f. promoting measures to facilitate the application of this Convention.

    2. Decisions of the Consultative Committee shall be recommendatory in nature.

    3. The Consultative Committee shall maintain the confidentiality of any information it receives in the exercise of its functions, if requested to do so.

    Article XXI
    Structure and Meetings of the Consultative Committee

    1. The Consultative Committee shall consist of one representative of each State Party.

    2. The Consultative Committee shall hold one regular meeting each year and shall hold special meetings as necessary.

    3. The first regular meeting of the Consultative Committee shall be held within 90 days following deposit of the 10th instrument of ratification of this Convention. This meeting shall be held at the headquarters of the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States, unless a State Party has offered to host it.

    4. The meetings of the Consultative Committee shall be held at a place decided upon by the States Parties at the previous regular meeting. If no offer of a site has been made, the Consultative Committee shall meet at the headquarters of the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States.

    5. The host State Party for each regular meeting shall serve as Secretariat pro tempore of the Consultative Committee until the next regular meeting. When a regular meeting is held at the headquarters of the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States, a State Party that will serve as Secretariat pro tempore shall be elected at that meeting.

    6. In consultation with the States Parties, the Secretariat pro tempore shall be responsible for:

    a. convening regular and special meetings of the Consultative Committee;

    b. preparing a draft agenda for the meetings; and

    c. preparing the draft reports and minutes of the meetings.

    7. The Consultative Committee shall prepare its own internal rules of procedure and shall adopt them by absolute majority.

    Article XXII
    Signature

    This Convention is open for signature by member states of the Organization of American States.

    Article XXIII
    Ratification

    This Convention is subject to ratification. The instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States.

    Article XXIV
    Reservations

    States Parties may, at the time of adoption, signature, or ratification, make reservations to this Convention, provided that said reservations are not incompatible with the object and purposes of the Convention and that they concern one or more specific provisions thereof.

    Article XXV
    Entry into Force

    This Convention shall enter into force on the 30th day following the date of deposit of the second instrument of ratification. For each state ratifying the Convention after the deposit of the second instrument of ratification, the Convention shall enter into force on the 30th day following deposit by such state of its instrument of ratification.

    Article XXVI
    Denunciation

    1. This Convention shall remain in force indefinitely, but any State Party may denounce it. The instrument of denunciation shall be deposited with the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States. After six months from the date of deposit of the instrument of denunciation, the Convention shall no longer be in force for the denouncing State, but shall remain in force for the other States Parties.

    2. The denunciation shall not affect any requests for information or assistance made during the time the Convention is in force for the denouncing State.

    Article XXVII
    Other Agreements and Practices

    1. No provision in this Convention shall be construed as preventing the States Parties from engaging in mutual cooperation within the framework of other existing or future international, bilateral, or multilateral agreements, or of any other applicable arrangements or practices.

    2. States Parties may adopt stricter measures than those provided for by this Convention if, in their opinion, such measures are desirable to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

    Article XXVIII
    Conference of States Parties

    Five years after the entry into force of this Convention, the depository shall convene a conference of the States Parties to examine the functioning and application of this Convention. Each conference shall determine the date on which the next conference should be held.

    Article XXIX
    Dispute Settlement

    Any dispute that may arise as to the application or interpretation of this Convention shall be resolved through diplomatic channels or, failing which, by any other means of peaceful settlement decided upon by the States Parties involved. Article XXX Deposit

    The original instrument of this Convention, the English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish texts of which are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States, which shall forward an authenticated copy of its text to the Secretariat of the United Nations for registration and publication, in accordance with Article 102 of the United Nations Charter. The General Secretariat of the Organization of American States shall notify the member states of the Organization of the signatures, of the deposits of instruments of ratification and denunciation, and of any reservations.

    ANNEX

    The term "explosives" does not include: compressed gases; flammable liquids; explosive actuated devices, such as air bags and fire extinguishers; propellant actuated devices, such as nail gun cartridges; consumer fireworks suitable for use by the public and designed primarily to produce visible or audible effects by combustion, that contain pyrotechnic compositions and that do not project or disperse dangerous fragments such as metal, glass, or brittle plastic; toy plastic or paper caps for toy pistols; toy propellant devices consisting of small paper or composition tubes or containers containing a small charge or slow burning propellant powder designed so that they will neither burst nor produce external flame except through the nozzle on functioning; and smoke candles, smokepots, smoke grenades, smoke signals, signal flares, hand signal devices, and Very signal cartridges designed to produce visible effects for signal purposes containing smoke compositions and no bursting charges.

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    They got caught slipping. My M4 and Glock 23 are ready to go. Had they been better prepared, maybe some of the deaths couldve been avoided.
    I expect school children to be protected by someone with the ability to properly do so.

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Vegas, bitches!!!
    Posts
    3,855
    So you expect police in every classroom? And you would expect every person to walk around armed without any oversight? That's just not logical! I have a CCW as well (because of my job), but there are several places I cannot carry the weapon(s). Having a firearm won't prevent idiots from shooting up places nor will it guarantee someone will use their own weapon to protect everyone else. Unless you've seen combat or been in situations where deadly force has to be used, you cannot guarantee whether you'll be able to respond appropriately and not end up shooting an innocent bystander. That is why I'm in favor of gun licensing.

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    Well I won't get into where I've been and what I've done with you. But rest assured anyone coming in my house wishing harm upon my family will not be leaving on their own accord.

    I don't have a problem with licensing someone who wishes to own a firearm. What I have a problem with is banning assault rifles.

    Guns will not prevent bad things from happening, but they can soften the blow. There are many incidents which could have been drastically less tragic had someone taken it upon themselves to stop a rampaging gunman. Theres no reason that large amounts of people should die at the hands of one deranged individual who feels he has the right to walk around shooting people.

    Criminals are criminals. By definition, they break laws. Banning assault weapons will not prevent criminals from obtaining and using these weapons, it will only handicap people's ability to defend themselves.

    In your own town of Las Vegas, there was a man named Jose Vigoa. For two years he ran rampant up and down the strip taking armored trucks and casinos for millions of dollars. No one could stop him. Why? Because he was prepared. He was a criminal, he saw weaknesses and exploited them. He was bringing AK-47s and MAK-90s against Smith & Wesson revolvers. What if some of the people he killed had been better armed and trained to deal with a situation? He cut down two armored car guards in a parking lot, in broad day light, on the strip.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Vegas, bitches!!!
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Nooomoto View Post
    Well I won't get into where I've been and what I've done with you. But rest assured anyone coming in my house wishing harm upon my family will not be leaving on their own accord.

    I don't have a problem with licensing someone who wishes to own a firearm. What I have a problem with is banning assault rifles.

    Guns will not prevent bad things from happening, but they can soften the blow. There are many incidents which could have been drastically less tragic had someone taken it upon themselves to stop a rampaging gunman. Theres no reason that large amounts of people should die at the hands of one deranged individual who feels he has the right to walk around shooting people.

    Criminals are criminals. By definition, they break laws. Banning assault weapons will not prevent criminals from obtaining and using these weapons, it will only handicap people's ability to defend themselves.

    In your own town of Las Vegas, there was a man named Jose Vigoa. For two years he ran rampant up and down the strip taking armored trucks and casinos for millions of dollars. No one could stop him. Why? Because he was prepared. He was a criminal, he saw weaknesses and exploited them. He was bringing AK-47s and MAK-90s against Smith & Wesson revolvers. What if some of the people he killed had been better armed and trained to deal with a situation? He cut down two armored car guards in a parking lot, in broad day light, on the strip.

    I was speaking in generalizations not specifically about you. The average citizen wouldn't be able to properly handle a high stress situation.

    Poor choice of examples when using Jose Vioga. Why? Because he robbed casinoes with armed guards and armored cars with armed guards. Regardless of the firearms the guards were still armed.

    Assault weapons by definition are designed for close to medium range combat when multiple threats or targets are present, correct. Most violent crime in this country consists of one person perpatrating these heinous acts. Of course there are exceptions, but the vast majority show otherwise.

    Please answer the initial question...name a country with no gun control laws or that allow assault weapons that have proven to lower crime or gun crime in general.

  40. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    I can't name a country with no gun control laws that is proven to have lower crime...lower crime when compared to what? I think the United States is prety f'kin great, and we've been allowed to have weapons for quite some time.

    As far as the average citizen not being able to handle a high stress situation, you are right. But I'd rather give the average citizen a chance to effect his own survival, rather than handicap him.

    I only used Jose Vigoa as an example because you live in Vegas, illustrating that these things do happen close to your home.

    Assault weapons by definition are designed for close to medium range combat when multiple threats or targets are present, correct. Most violent crime in this country consists of one person perpatrating these heinous acts. Of course there are exceptions, but the vast majority show otherwise.
    Indeed they are designed for engaging multiple targets. I'll also agree that most violent crimes are committed by one person. But, going by The Rules of Action (military), I'd rather stack the odds in my favor. Fair fights are for boxers.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

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