NBC'a David Gregory Weapons Violation

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChurchSoldier
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure what having the draft activated has to do with it.

The point about the assassination though does bring to light what several of us have been speaking about. The rifle used to assassinate him was a bolt action rifle with a 6 shot magazine. Which holds to the point that it is not the weapon used, it is the evil in a person’s heart.

Once the “reasonable restrictions” fail to prevent the next guy with a hunting rifle from committing an evil act, the next “reasonable restriction” will be to outlaw whatever weapon they used. Which brings us to the natural conclusion that the only way to stop it all would be a totalitarian society.

Let me ask you then, other than taking away hi capacity magazines, what is your solution to stop people from committing evil?
First one needs to define “high cap” magazines. From what I’ve been reading, it’s anything over ten rounds. The Glock 23 which is one of the standard law enforcement weapons has an optional magazine capacity of 17 rounds and can be dropped and re racked in under a second, giving the holder of said weapon greater firepower that can be fired as fast as any AR. Any cop will take his Glock into a close quarter firefight before an AR yet the AR is getting all the attention because of it’t “military” styling…whatever that means.
 
We all know what it means.
What does it mean? That it merely looks like a assualt weapon or that it operates like one?

Believe it or not, there is a difference; and on another note, there is a use for the scary looking semiautomatic modern sporting rifles that they want to ban so badly (predator hunting and hog hunting for example).
 
What does it mean? That it merely looks like a assualt weapon or that it operates like one?

Believe it or not, there is a difference; and on another note, there is a use for the scary looking semiautomatic modern sporting rifles that they want to ban so badly (predator hunting and hog hunting for example).
Look up the weapons used by the last 4 or 5 mass shooters; e.g. theater, mall, school, and first responders.
 
Draft, militia, see any connection at all?

**How many children would have died in Connecticut if the shooter had been limited to a bolt action gun, with 6 shots? **
It doesn’t matter (for the sake of this argument). John Muhammed and Lee Malvo held the nation captive as the “DC Snipers” in 2002 which, btw was during the AWB, with one or two shots at a time. All someone would need to do is go to school yards at recess and shoot one child. The next week another. One at a time would have the same effect, the nation would be paralyzed. Evil will find a way to act itself out.
**Where are the suggestions of things to help, or modifications of suggestions made? All I see are the ‘government bad’ arguments. **
What people are saying which you take as “government bad” is 1) that government is not the solution and 2) the nature of government is to always grow bigger and more powerful at the expense of the average citizen. No one here has suggested there are not good and valid reasons for the government and that ours is not a great nation. Many of us have served just so we can have discussions like this without worrying about someone knocking on our doors.

Secondly, the types of suggestions you mention have been tried. Lee Harvey Oswald could buy his rifle by mail order - the “solution” was Federal Firearms Dealers who would do background checks to make sure “dangerous people” couldn’t get guns.

The AWB limited magazine capacity~crime didn’t change. DC made people lock up their weapons~crime rose. Major cities who outlaw firearms such as NYC, Washington DC and Chicago have the highest murder rates in the country while those who implement concealed carry laws see crime drop. So, it is not that we aren’t hearing what you are saying or trying to be disrespectful, it is that those things have proved not to work.
Christianity has been working on the evil heart solution for generation, after generation. Look where we are now. It’s getting worse and worse. Of course that has been stated throughout mankind’s history. Logistically, it would be easier to control guns than such a massive population, if we want to make any difference at all. With that said, neither can be left out. All is a part of the solution, and it won’t be 100%.
Finally we are getting to a real solution. The enemies greatest victory was when he got the Bible thrown out of schools. As a nation we have decided it is less harmful to us as a whole to have Connecticut’s and Columbines than have the students hear “Thou shalt not murder” and “Love your neighbor as yourself”. (sounds pretty harsh when put that way, doesn’t it?) Since Scripture has been removed from the public conscience all negative factors in society have risen. I would say logistically it would be MUCH easier to have every school district read a few verses of scripture each day than to expand a system to further reduce our freedoms.
 
Do we really? If Someone Who Is’t Me owned an M1 carbine, would he own an assault weapon or a semi auto rifle???
What if the person had a Gatling gun? It does no good to try and confuse the issue with historical weapons. Look at the preferred weapon of mass shooters over the past few years.
 
It doesn’t matter (for the sake of this argument). John Muhammed and Lee Malvo held the nation captive as the “DC Snipers” in 2002 which, btw was during the AWB, with one or two shots at a time. All someone would need to do is go to school yards at recess and shoot one child. The next week another. One at a time would have the same effect, the nation would be paralyzed. Evil will find a way to act itself out.
It very well matters. You and I both know the limitations had that type rifle been used at the school in Connecticut, like my question referred too. How many people would have been shot in the theater if that shooter had used a bolt action, 6 shot, rifle, where a majority of victims were adults; 12 killed, and 50 something injured?
What people are saying which you take as “government bad” is 1) that government is not the solution and 2) the nature of government is to always grow bigger and more powerful at the expense of the average citizen. No one here has suggested there are not good and valid reasons for the government and that ours is not a great nation. Many of us have served just so we can have discussions like this without worrying about someone knocking on our doors.
The comments have borderline delusional characteristics. Reality check, ‘the government is in control’, and there are checks and balances in place to prevent the gross distortions being used by some to justify their position in this debate. No one, with their puny armament, is keeping the government in check. It’s one thing to speak anonymously through an online forum, it would be quite another for one to go public with some of the things that’s been said in these discussions. I doubt some of those remarks would receive the same pats on the back support we’ve seen from other anonymous posters.
Secondly, the types of suggestions you mention have been tried. Lee Harvey Oswald could buy his rifle by mail order - the “solution” was Federal Firearms Dealers who would do background checks to make sure “dangerous people” couldn’t get guns.

The AWB limited magazine capacity~crime didn’t change. DC made people lock up their weapons~crime rose. Major cities who outlaw firearms such as NYC, Washington DC and Chicago have the highest murder rates in the country while those who implement concealed carry laws see crime drop. So, it is not that we aren’t hearing what you are saying or trying to be disrespectful, it is that those things have proved not to work.
One suggestion was for stricter registration, with documentation of transfer of ownership even in private sales. I forget, what was your position on that? That amounts to shutting down mail order rifles.

Let’s review reality a moment. What was the crime rate in Newtown, Connecticut? Over the past decade, Newtown was contender for ‘safest town in America’ title from different media agencies. I heard once it was considered the 5th safest place to live in America.

When it’s convenient, gun rights advocates speak of how strict the gun control laws were in Connecticut, and ‘they didn’t work!’ Now, let’s move to the inner cities of major metropolis’, where the population is 26 or 27 times higher than Newtown, crime rate is high. No fooling? Washington DC’s crime index is 5, out of 100, for being safest. Newtown’s crime index is, or was, 90, out of 100 for being the safest.

Now, where’s the source showing a direct correlation of gun controls contributing to greater instances of violence? What came first, the gun controls, or the violence that prompted the gun controls?
Finally we are getting to a real solution. The enemies greatest victory was when he got the Bible thrown out of schools. As a nation we have decided it is less harmful to us as a whole to have Connecticut’s and Columbines than have the students hear “Thou shalt not murder” and “Love your neighbor as yourself”. (sounds pretty harsh when put that way, doesn’t it?) Since Scripture has been removed from the public conscience all negative factors in society have risen. I would say logistically it would be MUCH easier to have every school district read a few verses of scripture each day than to expand a system to further reduce our freedoms.
Yes! Let’s tackle the largest logistical challenge, rather than inconvenience ourselves through any additional gun controls. As Christians, shouldn’t be contributing in both ways?
 
This seems oversimplistic. How does one explain what happened to David Koresh, for example?
You mean the Rev. Jim Jones, don’t you?

Just throwing that in for consideration. Your point is good.
 
AR 15, public version of the M16, the military’s version.

Somehow, it attracts a type person seeking power, even if it’s recognized as a false power by others.
For one thing, an AR-15 is a semi-automatic weapon. An M-16 is a full automatic.

Do you understand the difference between a semi-automatic weapon and an automatic weapon? (Honest question).
 
Prodigal Son, may I suggest you read this article in its entirety before saying anything more about “assault weapons.”

kontradictions.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/why-not-renew-the-assault-weapons-ban-well-ill-tell-you/
Why? Take pictures of various guns to politicians, the media, or your average American, both gun owners and non gun owners, and ask them to pick out the pictures of the ‘assault’ weapons. Before you do this, you look through them and you pick out what you think they will pick out. We all know what assault rifles are.
 
What if the person had a Gatling gun? It does no good to try and confuse the issue with historical weapons. Look at the preferred weapon of mass shooters over the past few years.
To those who own these “historical” firearms it’s a valid question as they could also be part of any ban or control. They are roughly the same weight, a little shorter, have the same rate of fire and the same clip capacity as an AR-15. It can be purchased with a bayonet mount and collapsible stock. The only thing you can’t get is a “scary” plastic stock. Like the politicians, your lumping a lot of stuff into one category by using the term “assault weapon”. If controls are placed on a firearm because of the looks of it’s stock, the next logical step is controlling the mechanism itself and anyone who owns a semi automatic weapon will be at risk. No mention whatsoever is given to caliber so anyone with a .22 auto could be breaking the law, including two of my grand kids.

Just because the preferred vehicle of a drunk driver may be an F150 doesn’t mean we should discontinue it’s production.
 
Why? Take pictures of various guns to politicians, the media, or your average American, both gun owners and non gun owners, and ask them to pick out the pictures of the ‘assault’ weapons. Before you do this, you look through them and you pick out what you think they will pick out. We all know what assault rifles are.
I beg to differ with you, you seem to be a bit confused. Google “assault rifle” and you’ll see that it has to be selectable to full auto. That’s not what ANYBODY used in ANY of the shootings.
 
For one thing, an AR-15 is a semi-automatic weapon. An M-16 is a full automatic.

Do you understand the difference between a semi-automatic weapon and an automatic weapon? (Honest question).
There are a couple of differences. One fires as you pull the trigger, and the other auto fires as you hold the trigger. The second difference is, mass shooters are using the semi auto version, probably because they cannot get their hands on the full auto versions.

I served in the military, and used the M16. I’ve owned a M1 carbine as a civilian, when it was legal to have a 30 round clip. I sold the latter and bought a semi automatic 30.06, with a scope, for deer hunting. The M1 was ‘fun’, for a short period, but not practical for what I used a gun for at those times.
 
To those who own these “historical” firearms it’s a valid question as they could also be part of any ban or control. They are roughly the same weight, a little shorter, have the same rate of fire and the same clip capacity as an AR-15. It can be purchased with a bayonet mount and collapsible stock. The only thing you can’t get is a “scary” plastic stock. Like the politicians, your lumping a lot of stuff into one category by using the term “assault weapon”. If controls are placed on a firearm because of the looks of it’s stock, the next logical step is controlling the mechanism itself and anyone who owns a semi automatic weapon will be at risk. No mention whatsoever is given to caliber so anyone with a .22 auto could be breaking the law, including two of my grand kids.

Just because the preferred vehicle of a drunk driver may be an F150 doesn’t mean we should discontinue it’s production.
F150, designed to transport, and serve as work truck. AR15 designed to take life.
 
I beg to differ with you, you seem to be a bit confused. Google “assault rifle” and you’ll see that it has to be selectable to full auto. That’s not what ANYBODY used in ANY of the shootings.
Try what I said, then come back and tell me, I’m confused. To deny what the public is identifying as an assault weapon is not honest. Now, I have shot both types and I assure you, if I wanted to be I would be very proficient with the AR15 over the full auto M16.

What those shooters used, was an AR15. The full auto versions are already not allowed to be owned by civilians, unless there’s a ‘special permit’ I’m not aware of. Also, why bring up the military version if the guns used by the most recent shooters have been the civilian version, identified by press and politicians as ‘assault’ guns?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top