For those who carry arms on their boats-

Yes, he did stay that, do not know if it is true. I should clarify; I have seen 100 round magazines, never for an AR-15. The ones I have seen are not reliable or practical, the military does not buy any. I have fired and owned a number of different fire arms, and have even bought some "high capacity magazines", they were prone to jamming and were too clumsy to use for any practical shooting. I think those companies that make them just do it for the sake that there are people willing to buy them, so the make them even if not very practical.



About the news coverage, there is nothing reliable that has come from it. they showed an officer emtying the rounds from a shot gun found in the trunk of the suspects car and they all called it an "assault rifle" when it could be clearly seen it was a shot gun. NBC was reporting there was no "assault rifle" but rather four hand guns were used in the shooting. Who is right? So even if you can believe the news cast you linked to, he said it was found in the trunk, yet there have been no pictures of it.


This is all irrelevant anyway, your opinion is irrelevant; we have civil rights protection for owning such firearms. If you want to save lives why not put criminal in jail for life? why violate the civil rights of people based on what kind of gun they own, who have committed no crime? If we outlawed everything we do not "need" than they should out law boats, look at all the people and children who die from using boats, would it not save lives to outlaw boats? even if it just saved one life, would it be worth it?

 

The Aurora shooter started off with a pump action Remington 870 12-gauge shotgun, one of the most common shotguns in the world. If he'd kept using it the body count would have been a lot higher, since he was shooting blindly into a crowd in a darkened room.

Instead, he switched to a Smith & Wesson M&P15 an AR-15 semi-auto in .223 Remington (basically the same as 5.56×45mm NATO). He had an aftermarket 100-round drum magazine on it, which jammed on him after less than 30 rounds. No surprise there; the military doesn't use them because they're heavy, bulky, and so prone to jamming as to be almost useless in a combat situation.

He apparently finished finished up with a .40 caliber Glock semi-automatic pistol, versions of which are commonly carried by law enforcement personnel.

Regardless of what one thinks of so-called 'assault weapons,' the fact that the shooter switched to one with a drum magazine that jammed probably saved lives. He'd have been a lot deadlier if he'd stuck to shotguns.

 

Sorry100x38.

 

Its not just the u s either. Our tv here is just as bad. And kids playing black ops and other shooting games get brain washed into thinking violence is a normal part of life. The military even use these games as recruiting tools. If you get killed you come back to life in 30 seconds. Kids are bombarded with all this stuff but there is no explanation of real life consequences.

 

I find it ironic that the same guys that become irate at people coming up with boat "designs" based on dreams, comment on this thread even though they admit to having no training or expertise on weaponry. Is that what we call a double standard?

 

What does training with guns have to do with dozens of school lockdowns each week ?

do none gun owners have any rights when laws pertaining to guns are being formulated ?

 

to quote that famous philosopher and theologian, Mark Twain: "no man's life, liberty, or property are safe when congress is in session"

Despite civil rights being clearly articulated in our constitution, laws are always formulated that violate our rights, every year they are struck down by the courts. but every year our illustrious law makers are back at it again.

Restrictive gun laws get made all the time, and the get repealed or thrown out, over and over. Along with other routine violations of all of our other rights as well, so many that I will not bore you with them here.

You would think either the law makers would stop wasting time and money, or the voters would get wise to their wasteful incompetence. Alas, neither are about to happen anytime soon. There is a new term for these kind of voters: "low information voters", people who do not know, or do not care, what the people they elect are doing to them, or doing with their tax money.

 

LMAO!!

Points for you my friend!

 

Isn't that a toy guitar in the background




http://

 

No, those are a Fender and a guitar synthesizer.

 

ah man, the thought of that guy playing Guitar Hero in his undies was really funny

 

The big fat hairy thing at the back is a fender,---as good as.

I cant get over the hair cut, obviously a seriously deranged individual.

Thats a photo graph a jury would not be allowed to see.

 

I guess I'm not quite done with this thread after all; I think it needs a few facts to season the opinions.

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=7056

 

There's a perfectly good process in the US constitution for both creating and repealing amendments.

If the anti-gun people feel so strongly about it, why don't they use it instead of trying to find ways around the 2nd Amendment?

As a long-time firearms owner I personally have no use for the semiauto big magazine capacity firearms but I have no use for big powerboats either.

Anyone who thinks passing laws is going to eliminate firearms or even firearms abuse, please let me know. I have a friend with a bridge for sale.

PDW

 

The base clerk where I was working a few years ago (before the latest Supreme Court decision regarding guns) told me one day, "but there is no Constitutional right to own your own gun. We had a discussion in one of the law classes I was taking last year, and we all agreed that's not what the 2nd Amendment means."