Another mass shooting in the U.S

StinkyMunkey · 16-01-2013 10:28PM

Blay wrote: »

The Israeli Defence Forces use Ruger 10/22's..they're one of the most popular rimfire rifles in the world..ya can't take them off people because some military somewhere uses it.

Unless I missed it, they won't be taking any guns off anyone.

I could kill you with a revolver and one bullet...!

I think they are trying to limit access to certain weapons, whether it works remains to be seen.

meathstevie · 16-01-2013 10:29PM

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Is an assault style weapon not a gun that the military or law enforcement would utilise?

There are a lot of different types of guns, in sure they will come up with a way to categorise what falls under the assault style weapon.

In the strict sense of the term; long barreled firearm, capable of automatic and semi-automatic fire, intermediate rifle caliber, magazine fed. By extension I suppose smaller frame sub machine guns that fire standard pistol ammo and dedicated rounds like the FN P90 and the H&K MP7 should fall under the assault weapons category as well.

Witcher · 16-01-2013 10:29PM

MadsL wrote: »

OT: Out of interest, why? Apart from being cheap to armour?

I would't have thought the IDF would have settled for anything less than max firepower.

They use them to shoot guard dogs before operations apparently..also been accused of shooting protestors etc. in the legs with them to disable them.

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k70/crewgadjy/0003ze.jpg

StinkyMunkey · 16-01-2013 10:30PM

MadsL wrote: »

OT: Out of interest, why? Apart from being cheap to armour?

I would't have thought the IDF would have settled for anything less than max firepower.

I would have thought that too.

StinkyMunkey · 16-01-2013 10:32PM

Blay wrote: »

They use them to shoot guard dogs before operations apparently..also been accused of shooting protestors etc. in the legs with them to disable them.

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k70/crewgadjy/0003ze.jpg

Why am I not surprised. Shooting protestors that is!

MadsL · 16-01-2013 10:34PM

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Why am I not surprised. Shooting protestors that is!

hey..the dogs are pretty innocent!!

StinkyMunkey · 16-01-2013 10:35PM

I wasn't talking about police handguns, shotguns etc etc.

I was thinking more the guns they use when that little extra fire power is needed.

Did they not arm officers with assault style weapons after that shoot out in Hollywood in 97?

StinkyMunkey · 16-01-2013 10:38PM

MadsL wrote: »

hey..the dogs are pretty innocent!!

Give me a gun ho American cop over the IDF any day.

I think the Israelis think anyone not of their religion is a dog!

MadsL · 16-01-2013 10:39PM

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

I wasn't talking about police handguns, shotguns etc etc.

I was thinking more the guns they use when that little extra fire power is needed.

Did they not arm officers with assault style weapons after that shoot out in Hollywood in 97?

The point being made by myself and other posters is that "military" style or "assault" anything is a misleading label. Military around the world use anything from a .22 rifle up. All of those firearms with the exception of a full auto (banned anyway, except for very carefully policed Class III licences) do have a civilian and legal purpose (even in Ireland!)

Incidentally if that is the incident I am thinking of, then officers ran to a nearby gun store and commandeered firepower appropriate to the shootout.

StinkyMunkey · 16-01-2013 10:48PM

MadsL wrote: »

The point being made by myself and other posters is that "military" style or "assault" anything is a misleading label. Military around the world use anything from a .22 rifle up. All of those firearms with the exception of a full auto (banned anyway, except for very carefully policed Class III licences) do have a civilian and legal purpose (even in Ireland!)

Incidentally if that is the incident I am thinking of, then officers ran to a nearby gun store and commandeered firepower appropriate to the shootout.

Yes that's the one, I think they should have had access to them before that.

There is a great deal of media hype about "military/assault style weapons", I'm sure you could find a military somewhere in the world using WW2 weapons.

I couldn't put every weapon into its category, but someone in the government no doubt will.

MadsL · 16-01-2013 10:51PM

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Yes that's the one, I think they should have had access to them before that.

There is a great deal of media hype about "military/assault style weapons", I'm sure you could find a military somewhere in the world using WW2 weapons.

I couldn't put every weapon into its category, but someone in the government no doubt will.

I wouldn't hold your breath that it will be logical, reactionary laws are generally bad ones.

StinkyMunkey · 16-01-2013 10:52PM

MadsL wrote: »

I wouldn't hold your breath that it will be logical, reactionary laws are generally bad ones.

Yeah we'll, that's something we both agree on.

Sparks · 17-01-2013 01:18AM

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Once your a law abiding person, all this means is the hassle of having to go through more checks.

Here's the problem - if you're a law abiding person, you already abide by the laws that say don't murder people. So what's the point of the checks for those people? And won't the non-law-abiding people just circumvent the checks because they're awkward and the people don't care about the law?

Sparks · 17-01-2013 01:20AM

meathstevie wrote: »

I suppose smaller frame sub machine guns that fire standard pistol ammo and dedicated rounds like the FN P90 and the H&K MP7 should fall under the assault weapons category as well.

Nope. They've been banned in the US at the federal level since the 1980s (if it's fully auto and made after 1986, you can't have it in the US, basicly - Manic could give you the finer detail, I think they have a single exception for firearms manufacturers doing demos).

MadsL · 17-01-2013 02:38AM

Sparks wrote: »

Nope. They've been banned in the US at the federal level since the 1980s (if it's fully auto and made after 1986, you can't have it in the US, basicly - Manic could give you the finer detail, I think they have a single exception for firearms manufacturers doing demos).

Manic is not going to be happy. I believe he has an AR-15 and under the Feinstein proposal in California he will have to register it with the NFA - The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.

I would hope that there would be a negotiated exemption for veterans if this comes to pass. One marine veteran has already told the senator in an open letter "I am not your subject, I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant."

California, Feinstein specifically, seems to want to wage war on rifles with polymers stocks rather than wood. Black is scarier than brown it seems.

Lionel Messy · 17-01-2013 02:59AM

I feel for Obama. I don't particularly like him but the yanks have their bull**** laws. What a sick and decadent country. Obama strikes me as someone who would like to ban guns altogether but he can't say that publicly. Bunch of maniacs with guns the yanks. They'll never get it

MadsL · 17-01-2013 03:06AM

Lionel Messy wrote: »

I feel for Obama. I don't particularly like him but the yanks have their bull**** laws. What a sick and decadent country. Obama strikes me as someone who would like to ban guns altogether but he can't say that publicly. Bunch of maniacs with guns the yanks. They'll never get it

Here we go again. Yawn.

Care to have a debate rather than just throwing names at 310 million people?

Rasheed · 17-01-2013 03:12AM

It's funny. When the Sandy Hook atrocity happened, I did that knee jerk reaction of 'Oh the fecking Yanks and their stupid gun laws'.

Yet, with the rising number of burglaries here, I'm all for people having the right to protect themselves. Strange how when it might affect you or your, that your opinion changes.

Lionel Messy · 17-01-2013 03:35AM

We should be allowed murder people if they enter our homes. Enforce that law and we won't need guns, this is not America. Put an axe in someone's head. Job done.

Aquarius34 · 17-01-2013 06:49AM

Lionel Messy wrote: »

I feel for Obama. I don't particularly like him but the yanks have their bull**** laws. What a sick and decadent country. Obama strikes me as someone who would like to ban guns altogether but he can't say that publicly. Bunch of maniacs with guns the yanks. They'll never get it

You feel for Obama? what?

What is the obsession with people in Ireland loving Obama. He's an elitist who doesn't give a **** about the common Joe or Mary.

Gun should not be banned. These mass shooting's are all orchestrated and done with MK ultra. Time and time again, people just blindly accept the media and take whatever they say or put out. Typical. Roll over and believe every god damn noise you hear or every god damn lie a politician tell's you.

MadsL · 17-01-2013 06:52AM

Aquarius34 wrote: »

You feel for Obama? what?

What is the obsession with people in Ireland loving Obama. He's an elitist who doesn't give a **** about the common Joe or Mary.

Gun should not be banned. These mass shooting's are all orchestrated and done with MK ultra. Time and time again, people just blindly accept the media and take whatever they say or put out. Typical. Roll over and believe every god damn noise you hear or every god damn lie a politician tell's you.

Please go back to Conspiracy Theories, please.

Please...

now.

Aquarius34 · 17-01-2013 06:55AM

Everything dangerous nowadays.

You know whats more dangerous to me, living amongst a mindless moronic society whereby we accept everything the elite tells us or commands us to do.

If we ban guns, may as well ban kitchen knives. Forks too, because there sharp too! Ban cars also, you could drive that straight into your next murder victim. May as well, can't use guns. This gun issue is so f8cking ridiculous.

The problem stems down to the elite not wanting the masses to be armed with weapons to use on them. People are starting to wake up and turn on the elite now because we the people are fed up with the corruption and that is what is frightening them now. They have spent decades trying to strip us from our freedoms and keep us all up to our eyeballs in debt. These are all just more tactics to completely enslaves us into a mindless moronic dependent herded race. It's working already it seems.

Aquarius34 · 17-01-2013 06:59AM

MadsL wrote: »

Please go back to Conspiracy Theories, please.

Please...

now.

Perhaps you should stop stalking me. At least it then won't appear that you find my post's on different random threads all the time! It's getting a bit sadistic.

MadsL · 17-01-2013 07:03AM

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Perhaps you should stop stalking me. At least it then won't appear that you find my post's on different random threads all the time! It's getting a bit sadistic.

Stalking you???

I have 163 posts in this thread. I've posted most of those before you even regged on boards.ie

Is that run_to_da_hills I hear calling you....

Rasheed · 17-01-2013 07:24AM

Lionel Messy wrote: »

We should be allowed murder people if they enter our homes. Enforce that law and we won't need guns, this is not America. Put an axe in someone's head. Job done.

You make it sound so simple! And I don't know would it, God forbid you would actually be in that position, be classed as murder.

Would it be manslaughter as it wasn't premeditated or would having a gun for protection be classed as premeditated?

Aquarius34 · 17-01-2013 07:29AM

MadsL wrote: »

Stalking you???

I have 163 posts in this thread. You've posted most of those before you even regged on boards.ie

Is that run_to_da_hills I hear calling you....

You have choices, you don't have to read my posts. I never forced you to agree or read my posts.:)

MadsL · 17-01-2013 07:31AM

Aquarius34 wrote: »

You have choices, you don't have to read my posts. I never forced you to agree or read my posts.:)

Choice made. Ignore button. Bye. Remember to take your meds.

latenia · 17-01-2013 07:53AM

Lionel Messy wrote: »

I feel for Obama. I don't particularly like him but the yanks have their bull**** laws. What a sick and decadent country. Obama strikes me as someone who would like to ban guns altogether but he can't say that publicly. Bunch of maniacs with guns the yanks. They'll never get it

Obama (and the USA in general) is the ultimate hypocrite-he'll engage in mawkish displays like yesterday's with the Benneton kids on stage while simultaneously ordering the murder of brown children via missile strikes thousands of miles away. The gun laws themselves are not the root problem but they are one of the symptoms of the two main themes of the country's history since its foundation-greed and violence. It was an armed robbery from the moment the first settlers arrived and continues to this day.
I firmly believe that mass shootings are just another manifestation of the casual attitude to murder and violence together with the over-zealous execution of prisoners (and the crimes committed by those who are guilty), an out of control military, police brutality, gang violence, even television shows (primetime decapitation and mutilation fine; saying fúck or showing t1ts a no-no.)

CollardGreens · 17-01-2013 07:54AM

Spoons made me fat.

My gun keeps me safe from bad men in parking lots that lustfully stalk fat women.

Ban spoons.

AnonoBoy · 17-01-2013 01:22PM

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Gun should not be banned. These mass shooting's are all orchestrated and done with MK ultra.

And all the witnesses are actors or satanists controlled by the elite of course. :rolleyes:

Another mass shooting in the U.S

Comments