• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Colorado Shooting Goes Political

bobknightfan said:
I'm not worried about them, elkman....but evidently, some people are or we wouldn't be having them. I'm also not worried about your parsing of the terms about "automatic", "semi-automatic" or "assault" when describing weapons. I would say that if you are so concerned about this....no matter your age....your life priorities are totally fucked up. These weapons, however you wish to describe them, serve no useful purpose in this country. I fired automatic weapons when I was in the army....and that's the only place in this country where they are needed.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess that ends this discussion. Where is the next gun turn in? You convinced me...
 
bobknightfan said:
I'm not worried about them, elkman....but evidently, some people are or we wouldn't be having them. I'm also not worried about your parsing of the terms about "automatic", "semi-automatic" or "assault" when describing weapons. I would say that if you are so concerned about this....no matter your age....your life priorities are totally fucked up. These weapons, however you wish to describe them, serve no useful purpose in this country. I fired automatic weapons when I was in the army....and that's the only place in this country where they are needed.
Click to expand...

yep
 
bobknightfan said:
I'm not worried about them, elkman....but evidently, some people are or we wouldn't be having them. I'm also not worried about your parsing of the terms about "automatic", "semi-automatic" or "assault" when describing weapons. I would say that if you are so concerned about this....no matter your age....your life priorities are totally fucked up. These weapons, however you wish to describe them, serve no useful purpose in this country. I fired automatic weapons when I was in the army....and that's the only place in this country where they are needed.
Click to expand...

I fired them as well, US Army 1992 to 1996. M16A1, and M60somethingorother. Threw live grenades. If you cannot tell the difference between semi and full auto, and you call me fucked up, you are simply incompetent.
 
Last edited:
richis711 said:
To name a few...

To serve as a final check on the powers of the government. (the purpose of the second amendment)

To protect my house against a several looters in the event of a disaster.

To have responsible fun doing something I enjoy at a shooting range.
Click to expand...

You think you and your guns are keeping government in check? We thank you for your service.

Several? If 97 people invade your home, you are justified here.

What do you fire at the shooting range?
 
"To serve as a final check on the powers of the government."

Cop killers aren't treated too kindly.
 
ONW said:
You think you and your guns are keeping government in check? We thank you for your service.

Several? If 97 people invade your home, you are justified here.

What do you fire at the shooting range?
Click to expand...

I think that the nearly 300 million guns in America might make a Tyrannical government think twice, in the event that things got to the point of Tyranny.

If for some reason I'm in my home after a disaster and 3-4 armed folks think it would be a good idea to break in and take things, I'd rather have my AR 15 than a bolt action rifle... Not sure what else I need to say about that.

At the shooting range as far as rifles I shoot things ranging from AR 15's/ SKS/AK-47 to .22lr. Handguns I shoot the evil glocks, 1911s, berettas, smith and wesson revolvers, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ONW
fuck it, we live in an armed society. not too much we can do about it. There will always be assholes who shoot up public places.

as for the people arming themselves for the big disaster. haha ok well you will live a few days longer than me I guess when the whole thing goes to shit. you win
 
PhDeac said:
"To serve as a final check on the powers of the government."

Cop killers aren't treated too kindly.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about killing cops?

Just to clarify, in the event that it is civilians vs. government, I'm of the impression that our (for the most part) noble and good police force we have today would be long gone...

Obviously there being a need to overthrow the government would require massive changes from the situation we are presently in, which is pretty good all things considered.
 
Last edited:
richis711 said:
To name a few...

To serve as a final check on the powers of the government. (the purpose of the second amendment)

To protect my house against a several looters in the event of a disaster.

To have responsible fun doing something I enjoy at a shooting range.
Click to expand...


Fair enough, at least a direct answer.

Final check on government: if you think any kind of legal firearm is going to protect you against the US authorities, you should check out the video on The Pit where the Taliban go up against an Apache helicopter. When the Second Amendment was passed, the difference between the weapons available to private individuals and government forces was minimal. Today, thinking a private individual, or even a group of them, could resist the government with guns is sort of like me taking on an aircraft carrier with my sailboat. Not too smart.

Looting: I've always tried to avoid living in neighborhoods where there was much danger of looting. I've found that to be a sound, sensible and successful strategy, and I would advise it for anyone, especially if they have kids. You probably have a greater chance of being shot by a lunatic with a rapid fire weapon than being looted by rioters. Funny thing about lunatics and looters, they almost always show up when your rapid fire is unavailable.

Shooting range: well, if that's how you wanna get your kicks, shooting rapid fire weapons safely and under supervision at a shooting range, then be my guest. But then you could keep your rapid fire weapons there, just in case lunatics or looter wanna bees break into your home when you are not there and steal them. Seems to me that the odds of being burglarized is much greater than having to confront looters. And much much greater than successfully taking on Uncle Sam with a gun.
 
richis711 said:
To name a few...

To serve as a final check on the powers of the government. (the purpose of the second amendment)

To protect my house against a several looters in the event of a disaster.

To have responsible fun doing something I enjoy at a shooting range.
Click to expand...

And thinning out feral hog populations.
 
Really?

richis711 said:
To name a few...

To serve as a final check on the powers of the government. (the purpose of the second amendment)

QUOTE]

This is the third or fourth time in recent days that I have seen someone list "a final check on the powers of govenrment" or something similar as a reason to own weapons. Are you expecting to be invaded by the Marines or just your local Police? Either way you are outgunned and outmanned! If it is just to protect yourself from oppressive rule of your local zoning or code enforcement officer, you may have a fighting chance but that is beyond disturbing.

I just don't understand this argument!
Click to expand...
 
richis711 said:
To name a few...

To serve as a final check on the powers of the government. (the purpose of the second amendment)

Anyone who believes this is totally delusional. If you think having guns would stop the government whatever they want to you, there must be a black helicopter circling your home 24/7.

To protect my house against a several looters in the event of a disaster.

When was the last time anyone in your neighborhood was invaded by "several looters"? Are you expecting a zombie invasion?

To have responsible fun doing something I enjoy at a shooting range.
Click to expand...

You said the oversized magazines were heavier and harder to shoot with. Why would want to spray shots at as range?

There are NO legitimate reasons for individuals to have expanded magazines.
 
AnotherWF1stDown said:
richis711 said:
To name a few...

To serve as a final check on the powers of the government. (the purpose of the second amendment)

QUOTE]

This is the third or fourth time in recent days that I have seen someone list "a final check on the powers of govenrment" or something similar as a reason to own weapons. Are you expecting to be invaded by the Marines or just your local Police? Either way you are outgunned and outmanned! If it is just to protect yourself from oppressive rule of your local zoning or code enforcement officer, you may have a fighting chance but that is beyond disturbing.

I just don't understand this argument!
Click to expand...

Well said. Either way, you'd think the 2nd amendment folks would at least want to help even the odds and cut defense spending if they're so worried.
Click to expand...
 
RJKarl said:
You said the oversized magazines were heavier and harder to shoot with. Why would want to spray shots at as range?

There are NO legitimate reasons for individuals to have expanded magazines.
Click to expand...

A 30 round magazine on an AR 15 is not hard to shoot with... on a glock, it is.

A 100 round magazine on an AR is. I'm not a fan of oversized magazines, just the size that the weapons were designed to be used with.
 
RJKarl said:
You said the oversized magazines were heavier and harder to shoot with. Why would want to spray shots at as range?

There are NO legitimate reasons for individuals to have expanded magazines.
Click to expand...


The Koreans after the Rodney King riots?
 
richis711 said:
A 30 round magazine on an AR 15 is not hard to shoot with... on a glock, it is.

A 100 round magazine on an AR is. I'm not a fan of oversized magazines, just the size that the weapons were designed to be used with.
Click to expand...

Again there is no justification for anything over the size of the magazine the product was designed to use.

Your zealotry helps criminals not the public.
 
RJKarl said:
You said the oversized magazines were heavier and harder to shoot with. Why would want to spray shots at as range?

There are NO legitimate reasons for individuals to have expanded magazines.
Click to expand...

Not to pick on rj, but statements like this are vague, open-ended and hurt reasonable gun control initiatives, IMO. So do the statements (by others) that call semi-automatic weapons automatic weapons.

Let's start with the absurd 30 (or higher) capacity magazines. They're pretty hard to justify. Instead of calling for the re-institution of the assault weapons ban, let's refine the old statute to deal with important gun functions, not appearance...not an easy task, but we need to take away the easy arguments against the statute.
 
so I'm getting a consensus once again that nothing should be done, right? keep things as they are?
 
WFU71 said:
Not to pick on rj, but statements like this are vague, open-ended and hurt reasonable gun control initiatives, IMO. So do the statements (by others) that call semi-automatic weapons automatic weapons.

There's nothing vague about what I said. In earlier posts Richis said larger magazines are heavier and harder to use.

He said it not me.

He then said it would infringe on his enjoyment at shooting ranges. If it's harder to use and heavier, why would it be more fun?

Let's start with the absurd 30 (or higher) capacity magazines. They're pretty hard to justify. Instead of calling for the re-institution of the assault weapons ban, let's refine the old statute to deal with important gun functions, not appearance...not an easy task, but we need to take away the easy arguments against the statute.
Click to expand...

You ans I exactly agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top