Author Topic: Help revoke Bowling for Columbine's Oscar (Read 5887 times)

funkedup · « **Reply #210 on:** May 03, 2003, 04:47:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by vorticon
funked...unless you live in the downtown core or hunt for food NOONE needs a gun

And noone has a right to tell me what I do or don't need and can or can't own.

Toad · « **Reply #211 on:** May 03, 2003, 05:08:11 PM »

So a desire to target shoot would not be a legitimate need for a gun?

The people who participate in over 6000 Amateur Trapshooting Association sanctioned meets, for just one example, don't have a need for a gun?

Not to mention, Skeet, Sporting Clays and the various and numerous rifle and pistol competitions?

Imp · « **Reply #212 on:** May 03, 2003, 08:50:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sox62
Sorry,I wasn't sure which way that sarcasm was pointed-my bad.

I'm still not sure what some people think registration would accomplish though.Even if they do the "fingerprint" bs,anyone who knows anything about firearms can easily alter the ballistics of a weapon after it's been fired.

In my mind,registration has one purpose only-to be able able to locate weapons if it's decided we aren't allowed to own them anymore.

The fingerprint thing is a great idea. Someone steals your weapon and cant use it. How can this be a bad thing?

Registration allows cops to track the owner of the gun easily.
It does not prevent crime, it can help solve them though.

Sox62 · « **Reply #213 on:** May 03, 2003, 09:12:18 PM »

By fingerprinting,I am referring to ballistics.A shot is fired and saved in case the gun is used in a crime.

Besides the enormous cost of such a program,there is no guarantee that it would work.

Ex:I use my beretta in a crime.I go home,scrub the barrel with a stainless steel brush cleaner,then spend a whole sixty seconds swapping the firing pin.Guess what.The ballistics on the "fingerprint" shell are now worthless.

You want to have a useless fingerprint program,fine-just don't ask me to pay for it.Let the anti-gun people fund it if they find it worthwhile.I think they'd find that it would be an enormously expensive program that would yield almost no results.

But what the Hell,why stop there?Let's fingerprint every person who resides in America.So what the cost?If it catches one killer,it's worth it,right?

vorticon · « **Reply #214 on:** May 03, 2003, 09:21:52 PM »

we tried gun registration...major flop...billions of dollars (no im not overexagerating) and it pretty much did not and does not work...and is a record of the ballistics of every gun in america even feasable...

amazing how every post gets turned into a gun control war or pot discussion...

Mini D · « **Reply #215 on:** May 04, 2003, 12:56:01 AM »

Fingerprinting bullets for guns? LOL!

with difference to imp,

Does anyone here have any idea where the bullet picks up its "fingerprint"? I'll give you a clue... take an automatic pistol apart and hold that barrel in your hand. That's it... 100% of it. One piece that can be removed and replaced in less than 30 seconds... by anyone. No scrubbing or firing pin replacements necessary. Its akin to being able to pop your fingerprints off your hand and put them on someone else's without them knowing.

Wow... this one was better than "M-16 bullets are designed to be armor piercing".

It does highlight the major problem with most anti-gun regulations (and gun registration regulations) being introduced... they are being introduced by people who have no idea what they are talking about. No idea on the subject matter and no idea of the impact nor of the possible results. Imp highlights that to the n'th degree.

MiniD

beet1e · « **Reply #216 on:** May 04, 2003, 05:49:32 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mr. Toad
So a desire to target shoot would not be a legitimate need for a gun?

The people who participate in over 6000 Amateur Trapshooting Association sanctioned meets, for just one example, don't have a need for a gun?

Not to mention, Skeet, Sporting Clays and the various and numerous rifle and pistol competitions?

Mr. Toad, Those needs can exist and still be met, even in a country with "draconian" gun laws like those of Great Britain. Well, like most of the world actually. 98% of the world exists outside the US. But let's see, you yourself have been on hunting/shooting trips in England, so you know all this. Are you sure you should not have included a smiley/rolleyes in the above post?

Imp · « **Reply #217 on:** May 04, 2003, 05:50:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
Fingerprinting bullets for guns? LOL!

with difference to imp,

Does anyone here have any idea where the bullet picks up its "fingerprint"? I'll give you a clue... take an automatic pistol apart and hold that barrel in your hand. That's it... 100% of it. One piece that can be removed and replaced in less than 30 seconds... by anyone. No scrubbing or firing pin replacements necessary. Its akin to being able to pop your fingerprints off your hand and put them on someone else's without them knowing.

Wow... this one was better than "M-16 bullets are designed to be armor piercing".

It does highlight the major problem with most anti-gun regulations (and gun registration regulations) being introduced... they are being introduced by people who have no idea what they are talking about. No idea on the subject matter and no idea of the impact nor of the possible results. Imp highlights that to the n'th degree.

MiniD

Sorry sox62, thought you were talking about those guns with fingerprint readers on it. You have to put your fingerprint in it for it to work.

The gun striation registry would not be very useful to catch smart criminals. They could erase them or sell the guns to someone.

MiniD, whats the standard bullet for the M16 in the military?
Heres a clue: Its made of hard metal. This type of bullet has collateral damage (eg. killing innocents) tattooed all over it if fired in a residential area.
You have the right to defend your house, not to kill innocents.

Im not talking about other types of bullets that are sold, since I dont know the types being sold. I imagine there are alot of types.
I was refering to military weapons and ammo. Like those AP bullets.

Striations on bullets come from the barrel being designed to make bullets spin, which gives a better trajectory(gyrostabilization). Firing and Ejecting also leaves marks on the casing (is that the correct word?).

Not everyone uses english in everyday life MiniD. I could use French, but I doubt you would understand

I might not be using the right terms.

As for your insults, I wont dignify thoes with an answer

Mini D · « **Reply #218 on:** May 04, 2003, 06:10:39 AM »

LOL IMP! Man.. you really need to find another topic.

Did you really say "This type of bullet has collateral damage (eg. killing innocents) tattooed all over it if fired in a residential area." ?

ROLFMAO!

Even a full metal jacket .223 round (standard military ordinance) is not going to do anything near the damage that a 30.06 or .308 or .243 or .270 or... well.. just about any ordinance out there. It was not touted for its armor piercing capabilites. Maybe something teflon coated or with some kind of hydroshock, but those bullets aren't really available on the market for .223.

As far as it singling out innocents when fired in a residential area... well... that statement is just so stupid that I cannot begin to undestand just why you are posting in this thread. Damn dude... do you really think about what you post? Are you really arguing with lazs on the qualities of a gun in order to use it for riot control (by private citizens)? Stop and take a break to think it through there big guy.

Here's a tip. Before singling out the M-16 as a particularly lethal weapon when firing it into a crowd... do a bit of research. Maybe on the M-16 and as many other guns as you can look up and then at the likelyhood of firing it into a crowd.

MiniD

Imp · « **Reply #219 on:** May 04, 2003, 06:57:34 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
LOL IMP! Man.. you really need to find another topic.

Did you really say "This type of bullet has collateral damage (eg. killing innocents) tattooed all over it if fired in a residential area." ?

ROLFMAO!

Even a full metal jacket .223 round (standard military ordinance) is not going to do anything near the damage that a 30.06 or .308 or .243 or .270 or... well.. just about any ordinance out there. It was not touted for its armor piercing capabilites. Maybe something teflon coated or with some kind of hydroshock, but those bullets aren't really available on the market for .223.

As far as it singling out innocents when fired in a residential area... well... that statement is just so stupid that I cannot begin to undestand just why you are posting in this thread. Damn dude... do you really think about what you post? Are you really arguing with lazs on the qualities of a gun in order to use it for riot control (by private citizens)? Stop and take a break to think it through there big guy.

Here's a tip. Before singling out the M-16 as a particularly lethal weapon when firing it into a crowd... do a bit of research. Maybe on the M-16 and as many other guns as you can look up and then at the likelyhood of firing it into a crowd.

MiniD

A military M16 is fully automatic. So if you fire AP bullets with it it can kill innocents. Its more dangerous than 9mm. Which wont go through as much. Thats why most anti terrorist units use MP5 which uses 9mm.

Im talking about military M16, ive never seen a civilian one since I live in Canada. We dont have many of those around

Some SWAT team might use them. I was not talking about civilian one.

If you use a soft bullet with semi automatic, its fine.

If you use automatic with those AP bullets then it can be very dangerous. I never said it was the most dangerous weapon.

Of course the 30 06 as more power, but its not automatic. Its a great hunting gun, but in a house its a bit big. A shorter gun is more practical in most such cases. Shotguns are very effective weapons in a house, although they can cause alot of damage to your house.

So calm down and stop throwing insults. Read all my posts, I already said I dont have a problem with civilians semi auto M16.

Erlkonig · « **Reply #220 on:** May 04, 2003, 07:23:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Imp
A military M16 is fully automatic. So if you fire AP bullets with it it can kill innocents. Its more dangerous than 9mm. Which wont go through as much. Thats why most anti terrorist units use MP5 which uses 9mm.

True AP bullets aren't even legal here in the US. Only the military (and law enforcement?) has access to that kind of stuff. According to FBI tests, the 5.56mm bullet is actually less likely to blast through walls than pistol bullets - due to a combination of the former's high velocity, lesser mass, and bullet construction. This includes the standard stuff issued to our military.

Mini D · « **Reply #221 on:** May 04, 2003, 07:29:37 AM »

Imp, you are coming off less than half edjucated and refusing to admit it.

Talk about the possibility of collateral damage to innocents when firing an M-16 set to full auto using arming piercing bullets in a residential area all you want. It serves to validate the first sentance in this reply. It almost makes people forget you made the "M-16 bullets" comment.

But, alas, its still a stupid statement.

With the horrible lethality of an m-16 set to full auto using armor piercing bullets in residential areas you'd think you'd see more about them in the news. Unfortunately, most of what you see involves those harmless 9mms and equally not as worrisum hunting rifles/shotguns with non armor piercing ammo... even in residential areas involving innocents.

One common tactic of the less than edjucated is to pick and extreme and stick with it. Extremes are easy to understand because its so painfully obvious. If you can convince people that the extreme is bad, then you can convince them that the next thing down is bad too. AR-15s (the "civilian" version of the M-16) is a bad gun that looks just like an M-16 and should be banned. Good, that's been banned, but really, the Ruger Mini-14 is essentially the same gun (semi-auto, .223 with clip) and should be banned too. And if you thought those were bad, let me tell you about the badness of semi-automatic browning .308s, and semi-automatic shotguns, all pistols and anything else.

Its those damn M-16s. They're the real killer of innocents.

MiniD

Toad · « **Reply #222 on:** May 04, 2003, 07:41:32 AM »

Mr. Beet1e:

I thought it was so apparent that my post was in reply to this line

Quote

Originally posted by vorticon
unless you live in the downtown core or hunt for food NOONE needs a gun

that not even you would try to sidetrack the answering of my question.

It's not a matter of gun law. This gentlemen suggests there is "no"... as in "none"... need unless you "live downtown or "hunt for food".

Now, if you'd like to address the validity of his "need" statement, please do.

You are bored, aren't you?

Toad · « **Reply #223 on:** May 04, 2003, 07:54:16 AM »

LOL!

From CNN on the Dems Candidate Debate:

Quote

Stephanopoulos challenged Lieberman to defend the proposal that presidential candidate Al Gore had when the two ran on the same ticket in 2000 -- the licensing of all newly bought handguns.

Surprisingly, Lieberman said he never supported the proposal, which he said Gore came up with before he came on board.

"The American citizens have a right to own firearms," he said. "Licensing, registration, in my opinion are bad ideas and violations of that fundamental right."

Sen. Joe Lieberman, left, former Sen. Carol Moseley Braun, center, and Dean. When Stephanopoulos then asked whether any of the candidates would support licensing and registration of handguns, Sharpton was the only one to say that he would.

Well, their handlers have them talking the talk at least. I'll wager they don't really walk the walk though..........

lazs2 · « **Reply #224 on:** May 04, 2003, 09:20:24 AM »

nope toad.. all they have to do is answer the questionaire that the NRA sends out and they will reach 3-5 million voters with their stand.

imp.. you really have no idea of what you are saying. several ought six and 308 guns are semi and full auto. my M1 Garrand is a semi auto. A murder or a manslaughter is still the same no matter what caliber of gun you use. or... even if you use no gun at all.

Most cars are designed to be impervious to damage while running over people... A car that get's away from someone could kill dozens of children in without even being damaged. A woman named Ford used a Lincoln (car that is)to prove that point in downtown Reno once... A woman used a Colt 1911 in .45 to kill a Ford (president that is)and didn't succeed in killing anyone.
lazs