Assualt weapons

[_RockSlider]

You made some claims that were easily refuted, and I did so. Instead of just owning up to that fact and saying "OK, my bad, I was wrong," you have to pull a Ceeboo and go off on a rant about how you don't like me any more? This is third grade stuff, seriously.

Are you referring to the likes of this response???

believe, after all the crap you've been saying about personal gun rights and personal freedoms of every day citizens, that all along you've been referring to the military's right to use guns during wars?
Just who do you think is this stupid? You know this isn't what you were arguing.

Dude, you were clueless of what that discussion was even about, and you refuted me? Note that Mak knew better than to even respond to what that exchange was all about.

Maybe there were others you could point out where you have so clearly refuted me.

But unfortunately, it appears that the respect I had for your Book of Abraham arguments were unfounded, seeming as you have stated you did this same thing to the appologist as you do here.

I was hoping the burr was good discussion, not being a troll.

[_Lemmie]

you have to pull a Ceeboo and go off on a rant about how you don't like me any more? This is third grade stuff, seriously.

You are definitely enjoying your newfound giffing skill, aren't you, Ceeboo??!!!!

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Lemmie!

You are definitely enjoying your newfound giffing skill, aren't you, Ceeboo??!!!!

I most certainly am! (Thank you for your help.)

So much so that it makes me want to........

[_Kevin Graham]

Are you referring to the likes of this response???

No, what immediately comes to mind is your silly conspiracy theory about the shortage of ammo. A theory that comes straight out of the Blaze pipeline. It took me all of 30 seconds to google a refutation.

As far as what you just quoted, here is the overall context:

Mak: You're contributing to the gun culture that conditions people to think guns are more important than lives, and that's just sick.

Rock: Mak suggests that I have no morals to suggest that a legacy of individual Freedoms passed on to my posterity is far more important to the big picture than giving up my proxy dicks, he seems to have no understanding of people giving up their own lives to protect the very concept of Freedom.

Mak: Right now you're arguing that other innocent people should be giving up their lives for your very naïve concept of freedom.

Rock: No Mak, I'm saying my grandfathers generation (WWI/II), my fathers generation (Korean), my generation (Vietnam) voluntarily (or were forced by our Government) to give up their lives, supposedly for my very naïve concept of freedom.

Kevin: So now you want us to believe, after all the crap you've been saying about personal gun rights and personal freedoms of every day citizens, that all along you've been referring to the military's right to use guns during wars?

Granted, I only read your last response and did so in the context of what you were arguing with me about personal freedoms being take away. You speak of freedoms in the plural when really the only freedom we're talking about is the freedom to own machines designed to kill as many people as possible within a minimal time frame. That was why you made this long list of various models, asking me to tell you which one you couldn't have. That would be stacking the deck, making it look like it would be murdering a distinct freedom for each weapon. That's just silly.

[_EAllusion]

Civilians are no different from needing standard capacity or high capacity. All a bad guy has to do is hide behind a corner, and keep trying to kill you, and it's a gun fight, where all the rounds you can get is life or death.

How often would you predict that happens? That is to say, how many times a year do you think there has been an act of self-defense where someone needed to a high capacity magazine to get off enough rounds to adequately defend themselves? 5? 10? 100? 1000? 10,000?

It's hard to get good, non-partisan statistics on gun self-defense. There are definitely trends that emerge from the sociological research, though. One is the vast majority of instances of self-reported self-defense gun use involve simply brandishing it*. Justified fatalities when a gun is used are very rare, numbering a couple hundred at most. So the question is, how many cases do you think there are where it was necessary to empty a large number of rounds in defense? If I didn't know any better, I'd think your knowledge of gun use comes from B-movies and TV dramas.

*Interestingly, it's almost certainly the case that most of those self-reports don't actually involve justified self-defense, but rather involve people using a gun in a threatening manner as an escalation in an argument. People often seem to genuinely believe that is "self-defense" even when it is usually illegal and always socially undesirable.

[_Kevin Graham]

How often would you predict that happens?

Are you kidding? Don't you watch the movies? They never lie.

[Guest]

I'm no expert on the term, but the dictionary defines it three ways, and I think the third way is probably how you intended it:

Or you could state your own opinions without telling other people what it was they actually meant to say and/or how they intended it*.

I stated my case and my opinion, thank you for your opinion, maybe now would be the time for you to stop trying to pick every fight you can and follow your own rule:

But I'm not really interested in the tag-teaming and back-rubbing exercises...

*not to mention mak will surely take you to task for using a dictionary definition!

[_RockSlider]

No, what immediately comes to mind is your silly conspiracy theory about the shortage of ammo. A theory that comes straight out of the Blaze pipeline. It took me all of 30 seconds to google a refutation.

Ah yes, you're old Apologist ways coming through, quote some scripture and claim victory.

Kevin, I did not even respond to that because I knew it was a dead end, you had no personal experience with it other than a quick google search and would only derail the OP (i.e. part of you becoming a troll and winning by total derailment).

In other words, like the the first example; you were being troll like and did not deserve my time/response.

I will offer you that respect now for a brief response.

1. I don't give a crap about conspiracy theory discussions (sucked in too many times, waste of time). I assume you realize anyone can match you're pro or anti google responses one for one with the opposing view right?
2. People who actually own guns and buy ammo know that the shelves were empty. A thing which had NEVER before been seen.
3. 22 rim fire cartridges, the least likely ammo to be horded by gun nuts and not used by any government agency were impossible to buy, direct from manufacture, whole sell, retail, online, want adds ... nothing.

So, what exactly have you refuted here?

[_RockSlider]

How often would you predict that happens? That is to say, how many times a year do you think there has been an act of self-defense where someone needed to a high capacity magazine to get off enough rounds to adequately defend themselves? 5? 10? 100? 1000? 10,000?

It's hard to get good, non-partisan statistics on gun self-defense. There are definitely trends that emerge from the sociological research, though. One is the vast majority of instances of self-reported self-defense gun use involve simply brandishing it*. Justified fatalities when a gun is used are very rare, numbering a couple hundred at most. So the question is, how many cases do you think there are where it was necessary to empty a large number of rounds in defense? If I didn't know any better, I'd think your knowledge of gun use comes from B-movies and TV dramas.

Funny how an ardent defender of something, being ignorant of the actual facts, can be the causes worst enemy!

In theory, if one person in the CA shootings, with half decent target shooting ability (6" pattern ... chest, chest) had six rounds in a conceal carry ... lives may have been saved.


My wifes conceal. one shot stop - 357, 5 round, hammerless (not caught up on anything, double action only). Aim and pull the trigger, nothing more, nothing less. Fantastic purse gun.

This is my Glock-26, 10 rounds which I will likely start to carry

This is often the reviewers (people in the know) top suggested self defense conceal carry.

[Guest]

Wow, Kevin, you have issues!

Care to elaborate? I assume you're not referring to the varicose veins in my feet.

Or were you just jumping on the bandwagon of meaningless support for those who can't handle having their claims refuted?

Yep I do care to elaborate. I applied the Evelyn Woodhead sped redden' technique to go over this thread and I see at a glance Rock, Ceeboo, Gad, Jersey Girl, subgenus and others, even Mak and Faqs engaged in dialogue with and without disagreement but your posts are emotional and of tabloid quality.

Edited to correct: subgenius, my apologies.