Hence the problem.. However the recent ruling in the Supreme Court (with respect to the DC gun ban) was huge. It will be really tough for "Bah"ma to take mah guns.Pierre wrote:
Could you define 'assault weapons' for me?
a purely political term.Pierre wrote:
Could you define 'assault weapons' for me?
Nope...both of those have been restricted by the ATF since their invention (law written in 1934). Neither type can be purchased new or imported, since 1986.m3thod wrote:
ak47's m16 shit like that
i think.
i dont know dick about guns
How much is 3.7 % in the US?OP wrote:
In California, a statewide survey of law enforcement agencies by the state Department of Justice found that a mere 3.7% of firearms used in homicides and assaults were assault weapons.
The big UK gun laws (total handgun ban and stepping up on other restrictions already in place) were put in place as a result of the Dunblane massacre.Parker wrote:
the IRA gets itchy again?
i could not even imagine having guns be illegal, only to have to defend yourself and not have the ability.
the UK gun laws iirc, were put in place in the 20s to combat the IRA....that worked out so well.
Parker wrote:
how many civilians were killed without the chance to defend themselves?
Forgive my ignorance of the subject, but the law abiding popolus was disarmed as a result of criminal acts?Bertster7 wrote:
The big UK gun laws (total handgun ban and stepping up on other restrictions already in place) were put in place as a result of the Dunblane massacre.Parker wrote:
the IRA gets itchy again?
i could not even imagine having guns be illegal, only to have to defend yourself and not have the ability.
the UK gun laws iirc, were put in place in the 20s to combat the IRA....that worked out so well.
I aint got time to debate that mate but it isn't fully true.Parker wrote:
the IRA gets itchy again?Mek-Stizzle wrote:
I wouldn't mind owning a few M72 LAW's and a light machine gun myself
Just incase
i could not even imagine having guns be illegal, only to have to defend yourself and not have the ability.
the UK gun laws iirc, were put in place in the 20s to combat the IRA....that worked out so well. how many civilians were killed without the chance to defend themselves?
no, i dont want to leave in the cops hands....
from 1969-2006, 1855 people didnt have a chance to defend themselves. oh, and those are civilians bertster....thats all i really need to know about that conflict.Bertster7 wrote:
Parker wrote:
how many civilians were killed without the chance to defend themselves?
Shows a great lack of understanding of the conflict.
there were 39,000 incidents with firearms in that same time frame.jord wrote:
You can't defend yourself against car bombs and IED's. You could be carrying a fucking GPMG with 800 rounds and not have a chance.
So, you're for gun ownership now.jord wrote:
Fun fact. I can't wear my cammies out of centre because of terrorists, including the PIRA.
And we can own .22 rifles, I've been after a license recently.
I'll bet they happened on streets, where even if you did own a gun you wouldn't be carrying it...Parker wrote:
there were 39,000 incidents with firearms in that same time frame.jord wrote:
You can't defend yourself against car bombs and IED's. You could be carrying a fucking GPMG with 800 rounds and not have a chance.
I could explain my beliefs on it but they're pretty long and I've had a hard day. To summarise:DBBrinson1 wrote:
So, you're for gun ownership now.jord wrote:
Fun fact. I can't wear my cammies out of centre because of terrorists, including the PIRA.
And we can own .22 rifles, I've been after a license recently.
Last edited by jord (2008-10-14 11:46:58)
or how bout stupid law goes the way of the dodo like it should, until some lying sack of shit cookie cutter corrupted excuse for a politician tries to bring it back to gain the vote of the dumbasses who dont understand its a useless law in the first place?DesertFox- wrote:
If you buy them now, wouldn't the ban be an ex post facto law in regards to possesssion? You still couldn't use them, but would at least be able to have them in your collection until the ban expires or the ban is changed.
but... guns are teh evilzSEREMAKER wrote:
why do motherfuckers own a $100,000 2 door sports car ...... you can't load your friends in it, you can't carry anything larger then handbag in it
but its fun to drive
its fun to shoot .
Or just buy the upper and lower separate and your fine. You just keep them "apart".SealXo wrote:
california has pussy assault weapons laws on a m4 you have to take off the reciever and load it into a welded mag it is SO gay
or just buy a prebanSgtHeihn wrote:
Or just buy the upper and lower separate and your fine. You just keep them "apart".SealXo wrote:
california has pussy assault weapons laws on a m4 you have to take off the reciever and load it into a welded mag it is SO gay
Not that I'm for assault rifle bans, but have you ever read up on California gun laws? They are probably the shittiest gun laws in the country that forbid assault weapons except under strict conditions on the weapon modification, at least from how I understand it.mcjagdflieger wrote:
In California, a statewide survey of law enforcement agencies by the state Department of Justice found that a mere 3.7% of firearms used in homicides and assaults were assault weapons.