PDA

View Full Version : Gun control question in recent debate



midnight rambler
17th October 2012, 12:39 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0BVxO_61HE

midnight rambler
17th October 2012, 12:45 AM
Read between the lines.

Glass
17th October 2012, 01:18 AM
If the government stopped shooting the citizenry then most of the problem would disappear. The high death count events will. The one on one, you dissed me events would be what's left and I'd be happy letting people sort that kinda stuff out between themselves. Stand back then call in the "The Cleaner" afterwards.

Obama didn't want to talk about it at all. Of course focusing on social disadvantage has political merit and you can pitch it to the I wanna fee good whiteys and also to the That's whats keeping us down Leroys. It works both ways.

mamboni
17th October 2012, 05:16 AM
Obama said he only wants to take guns away from criminals and the insane. Unfortunately, he considers insane anyone who doesn't surrender all of his property and constitutional rights to an all powerful corporate-fascist government.

Insanity rate at GSUS is in excess of 99%.

chad
17th October 2012, 06:34 AM
i was under the assumption that it was already illegal to sell ak-47s. when did they suddenly become legal? i can't believe i missed this!

iOWNme
17th October 2012, 07:05 AM
Some old lady asks a question about AK47's?

THIS IS ALL STAGED!!!!!!


Notice Obama goes with the MEME of the American history of gun ownership has been for HUNTING and SPORTING...........And protecting yourself too.

mamboni
17th October 2012, 07:13 AM
i was under the assumption that it was already illegal to sell ak-47s. when did they suddenly become legal? i can't believe i missed this!

I just bought an AK-47 for my son. I'm assuming it's semiautomatic - the automatics are illegal. Someone here know the answer to this question. I am no expert on gun laws.

chad
17th October 2012, 07:17 AM
that's my point. semi auto 7.63 X 39 rifles aren't ak-47s. ak-47s are fully automatic.

sirgonzo420
17th October 2012, 07:18 AM
I just bought an AK-47 for my son. I'm assuming it's semiautomatic - the automatics are illegal. Someone here know the answer to this question. I am no expert on gun laws.

I think that chad was playing on the fact that an AK-47 is technically automatic, and that those rifles which are commonly referred to as "AK-47s" are actually semi-automatic variants.

"AK" stands for Автомат Калашникова, so it refers to refers to an automatic (selective-fire) rifle.

midnight rambler
17th October 2012, 07:55 AM
Notice Obama goes with the MEME of the American history of gun ownership has been for HUNTING and SPORTING...........And protecting yourself too.

But of course NOT with an AK-47.

midnight rambler
17th October 2012, 08:10 AM
I just bought an AK-47 for my son. I'm assuming it's semiautomatic - the automatics are illegal. Someone here know the answer to this question. I am no expert on gun laws.

The terms AK-47 and AK are interchangeable these days among gunowners, although as has been pointed out the 'AK' is a semi-auto variant of the select fire machinegun AK-47, AKS, AKM, etc.

And full auto guns are NOT 'illegal' they're just taxed, and, with the passage of McClure-Volkmer/1986 (the so-called 'Firearms Owners Rights Act' which the 5th column NRA supported) the pool of 'civilian' owned (and taxed and regulated by ATF) full auto guns was *frozen*, i.e. no more could be manufactured or converted from semi-auto (after passing a background check and paying $200 for the tax stamp) that which is out there privately owned is 'it'. Because there are only a few hundred thousand full auto guns in the NFA (National Firearms Act of 1934) Registry the prices of full auto guns has skyrocketed since May of 1986. While one could buy a M-16 machinegun for under $1,000 prior to May of '86, now M-16s sell for well over $10K (I gather the going rate for a M-16 is ~$15K, a Browning M2 .50 belt fed can be $30-50K). In fact there are 'drop-in auto sears' which for which a tax stamp has been acquired (prior to May '86) and are in the NFA Registry, and I've heard of those very simple devices selling for up to 6-7 thousand dollars ('cause one can drop one in a semi-auto HK rifle or carbine or a AR-15 and have a full auto gun [obviously it's not the same drop in sear for the two distinctly different guns]).

Don't let anyone misled you - if you WANT a full auto gun you can GET a full auto gun - 'legally' - so long as you pass the ATF/FBI background check, pay 200 FRNs for a tax stamp, AND have the deep pocket$ to buy a subgun or machinegun out of the limited supply available.

iOWNme
17th October 2012, 08:45 AM
MR nailed it.

Fully auto is completely LEGAL with a License. License = TAX.


Your 2nd Amendment is now TAXED.

midnight rambler
17th October 2012, 08:59 AM
MR nailed it.

Fully auto is completely LEGAL with a License. License = TAX.


Your 2nd Amendment is now TAXED.

License - permission to do something which would otherwise be illegal.

When one goes to a 'licensed' gun dealer (FFL) one fills out a form under the pains and penalties of perjury, submits it to the FFL, and the FFL turns around to contact NICS (thanks NRA!) 'asking permission' to allow you to take possession of the gun you wish to purchase. This is licensing in its truest sense, so now ALL new gun sales are 'licensed' individually via NICS.

Note in the debate segment I posted in the OP how Barry kept going back to how they've 'improved' 'the background check' (NICS) and how then plan on "continuing to *improve* background checks" (code talk for finding more and more ways to deny sales of guns) - this appears to be the route/approach the gungrabbers intend to exploit.

JohnQPublic
17th October 2012, 09:44 AM
I noticed also that Obama brought up the Aurora shooting incident. We still do not know who dun it, yet obviously more gun laws woulda prevented it.

iOWNme
17th October 2012, 10:28 AM
Lets not forget that general and complete disarmament for America has been in the US Code since 1961. STOP FALLING FOR CURRENT/RECENT PROPAGANDA.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6FJlvyKbhg

mick silver
17th October 2012, 11:07 AM
in most states you can own a full auto if you pay the tax stamp for it . i know here were i live i think it 600.00 for the stamp .... but you open your home up for them to look at what you have .

Norweger
17th October 2012, 01:43 PM
They want to ban semi-automatic weapons in general. They are very clear about this in Norway and it's coming to the USA as well, but obviously it wont be that easy in the US because of the second amendment and the culture surrounding firearms.

I see the future of gun-ownership in Norway as very restricted with guns stored at the range and hunting done only when the state permits it. Weapons for hunting will probably be stored in caches controlled by the same mafia and opened up only when you have your papers in order.

Yep, it's total insanity and there is no way to reason with these people.

midnight rambler
17th October 2012, 01:46 PM
Yep, it's total insanity and there is no way to reason with these people.

Well, there IS a way, it's just...messy.

JDRock
17th October 2012, 04:57 PM
all bullshit. its irrelevant what ANY candidate SAYS...remember bush1?? "there will be NO banning of assault rifles"
1 week later " the assault weapons that are to be banned are..." crooks liars thieves and fudge packers....dang, theres a song in that...hmmm

Twisted Titan
18th October 2012, 12:41 AM
in most states you can own a full auto if you pay the tax stamp for it . i know here were i live i think it 600.00 for the stamp .... but you open your home up for them to look at what you have .


correct you are mick and the same thing with the suppressors (silencers)

its a class 3 item and lots of hoop jumping but the biggest pitfall is that you give the ATF permission to show up.at your property at anytime to inpection and that just leaves the door open for a fishing expedition every time they show up

and they will.


Just wanted to clear up a other fallacy about suppressors