07-14-2014 07:46 AM
4,617 ... 7172737475 ...
tools
  1. mortalmallard's Avatar
    And in your military career did you use hollow point rounds for training? In the ten years I served I never once saw a hollow point.
    03-24-2013 06:04 PM
  2. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    People are acting like the military using lethal force against citizens has never happened before... well you're wrong. Whether the killing is done by a human or drone. Dead is dead.

    geekymcfly and KentuckyHouse like this.
    03-24-2013 06:12 PM
  3. Oilersboy's Avatar
    President himself will impose Marital law when economy have collapsed completely which is in near future because rioting and looting is everywhere in America.
    03-24-2013 06:24 PM
  4. Aquila's Avatar
    President himself will impose Marital law when economy have collapsed completely which is in near future because rioting and looting is everywhere in America.
    Where is that taking place at? I've been all over the US but I haven't noticed anything like, "rioting and looting everywhere". Are there any articles or videos, etc?
    msndrstood likes this.
    03-24-2013 06:28 PM
  5. geekymcfly's Avatar
    Since when is it legal to hunt humans?
    YouTube
    Since the dawn of man.

    Rooted: Tmo GS3: PacMan ROM : 4.2.2
    03-24-2013 06:51 PM
  6. geekymcfly's Avatar
    Where is Moses (The Raven)

    Hear no Napoleon, Hear No Snowball. Just hear yelling
    03-24-2013 07:13 PM
  7. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    It will take something bad happening to us for the people to decide anything needs to be done about it. We don't act in this country; we react. It's pathetic.

    And no, I really don't care how like or not like we may be to people in other countries. That's an excuse and a cop-out, doubly- and triply so because we want to go around pretending we're such an awesome, God's-gift-to-humanity country.
    03-24-2013 11:06 PM
  8. msndrstood's Avatar
    President himself will impose Marital law when economy have collapsed completely which is in near future because rioting and looting is everywhere in America.
    Lol, marital law. Isn't that being debated in the Supreme Court tomorrow?

    What?! ...I'm msndrstood.
    via Gnex
    03-26-2013 05:24 PM
  9. geekymcfly's Avatar
    Just a little article for you

    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/no-...-preparedness/

    Hear no Napoleon, Hear No Snowball. Just hear yelling, over the old ravens whispers
    Aquila likes this.
    03-26-2013 05:28 PM
  10. apalm8's Avatar
    That filibuster was amazing and it was great for Rand Paul to get in the national spot light. Rand Paul 2016.
    jdbii likes this.
    03-26-2013 06:42 PM
  11. ItnStln's Avatar
    That filibuster was amazing and it was great for Rand Paul to get in the national spot light. Rand Paul 2016.
    Word!
    03-26-2013 09:37 PM
  12. nancybout's Avatar
    Ok weird I'm seeing this cause there was a discussion about drone planes flying on 911

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Android Central Forums
    03-26-2013 09:52 PM
  13. jdbii's Avatar
    That being said, there isn't really a pro-2nd amendment or anti-2nd amendment camps. 99% of American's are pro 2nd amendment; we're just in disagreement on how to interpret it 250 years later.
    Good point. Never thought of it that way.

    Both sides are guilty of inventing reasons and interpretations of the 2nd amendment; so heavily that most of us don't even know we're arguing about the wrong amendment.
    I think the confusion bolsters and benefits those who advocate for more restrictions. So long as there is confusion then the issue becomes subject to prevailing politics.
    .
    I'm not sure it's exactly the same reason, because using a toy gun to rob a bank is using the threat of violence, and the bank employees may not know it's a toy. That's intentionally escalating the situation in terms of the bank's fear and therefore coerced compliance and it's done so intentionally, with the added cynicism of trying to dodge a label of, "armed robbery", which adds prison time, etc
    Agreed.

    The reality that these weapons are no more or less dangerous than their non "assault weapon" counterparts, that are merely cosmetically different.
    That is the uncomfortable truth that is avoided. Nonetheless, I do think it is okay to label a cosmetically modified firearm an "Assault Rifle" if in fact it functionally is not a weapon of war but only mimics one in appearance. Whether or not restrictions can be put on them for simply looking different goes to the heart of the debate.
    03-28-2013 03:53 PM
  14. Live2ride883's Avatar
    There are major differences between an assault rifle and an assault weapon.

    Assault rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    An assault rifle is a selective fire (selective between automatic, semi-automatic, and burst fire) rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.[1] Assault rifles are the standard service rifles in most modern armies. Fully automatic fire refers to an ability for a rifle to fire continuously while the trigger is pressed; "burst-capable" fire refers to an ability of a rifle to fire a small yet fixed multiple number of rounds with but one press of the trigger; in contrast, semi-automatic refers to an ability to fire one round per press of a trigger. The presence of selective fire modes on assault rifles permits more efficient use of rounds to be fired for specific needs, versus having a single mode of operation, such as fully automatic, thereby conserving ammunition while maximizing on-target accuracy and effectiveness.

    Examples of assault rifles include the StG 44, AK-47,[2]M16 rifle, QBZ-95, INSAS, FAMAS, Heckler & Koch G36, and Enfield SA80.

    The term assault weapon was coined by politicians and reporters to make semi-automatic rifles sound just as dangerous as the assault rifles used by some members of the armed forces.

    Assault weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Assault weapon refers to different types of firearms and weapons, and is a term that has differing meanings, usages and purposes.


    In discussions about gun laws and gun politics in the United States, an assault weapon is most commonly defined as a semi-automatic firearm possessing certain cosmetic, ergonomic, or construction features similar to those of military firearms. Semi-automatic firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is ejected and another cartridge is loaded into the chamber, without requiring the manual operation of a bolt handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. An assault weapon has a detachable magazine, in conjunction with one, two, or more other features such as a pistol grip, a folding or collapsing stock, a flash suppressor, or a bayonet lug.[1] Most assault weapons are rifles, but pistols or shotguns may also fall under the definition(s) or be specified by name.

    Despite the fact that these weapons are similar in appearance, the differ drastically in their use and function.

    I don't know anyone that calls every car a corvette simply because they all have 4 wheels..
    jdbii likes this.
    03-28-2013 07:45 PM
  15. Live2ride883's Avatar

    As far as something being illegal for looking like something it isn't. I think it is okay to make it illegal based on looks alone. I don't see a difference between that and having laws that make it illegal to hold up a bank with a toy gun that looks real.
    It's illegal to hold up a bank regardless of the tool used. Just like murder is illegal regardless of the weapon used. Making something illegal based on looks alone is kinda closed minded.

    But since you say it's OK, one would have to assume you are ok with that kid who got suspended for nibbling his pop tart into the shape of a gun, or the little girl for using her toy bubble gun.

    I have been around guns my entire life, I have raised my kids with and around guns. No one in my house or family has ever hurt anyone with a gun we used unless you count times of war. Almost every other gun owner in the US can say the same thing.

    Yes tragedies like Newtown are devestating, but you cannot take something away from everyone because a few misuse it. If you think that's OK I suggest you turn in every knife, hammer, baseball bat, pipe (lead or other wise) automobiles and anything else that could be used to kill someone.

    The danger an inanimate object from a gun, baseball bat, hammer presents to society is a result of the intent of the user.
    03-28-2013 08:09 PM
  16. jdbii's Avatar
    Thanks for correcting the terms I skewered. I am not speaking in terms of absolutes nor suggesting anything other than my opinion. As a matter of public policy there is room for laws that l restrict things based on appearances. Without such laws bank robbery with a toy gun wouldn't be 'armed' bank robbery, but a lesser criminal offense. Similarly, there are public policy reasons to have laws on the books that prohibit impersonating police officers or prevent modifying your car to look exactly like a police cruiser. I think the points you make are valid and I agree with much of what your write. I just happen to believe (and I am not suggesting I am right, but only offering my opinion) that there is room to debate as a matter of public policy and safety whether or not society wants weapons that are designed for war, even if only cosmetically, in the hands of civilians. There is a public benefit derived for certain things to be identified with certain parties. Shoot me if you disagree , but I certainly respect your opinion. For the record, I do support the 2nd Amendment. Have since college, and always will. I don't own firearms and never have. Just had a little bit of training -- aiming for for the target but missing it altogether and hitting the bags of sand off to the side to the disgust of the Marines trying to train me -- when I was in the Navy.
    03-28-2013 10:17 PM
  17. jdbii's Avatar
    But since you say it's OK, one would have to assume you are ok with that kid who got suspended for nibbling his pop tart into the shape of a gun, or the little girl for using her toy bubble gun.
    You got me here, but your off just a bit.............I'd only suspend the kid if the pop tart was blueberry.........and papa rode a Harley
    Live2ride883 likes this.
    03-28-2013 10:24 PM
  18. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    One of my co-workers, who is doing a research paper for one of his college classes on the benefits / detriments of gun ownership, has told me he's personally anti-gun ownership. We've been able to have some nice, intellectually-stimulating and thought-provoking discussions on the matter, which essentially is the only reason I've tolerated any such related discussions with him.

    Anyhow, so we were talking yesterday about this again (just light-heartedly) and I said to him, especially in light of all the shootings and violence we've seen in the past couple months, "You know what really bothers me the most, as a gun owner, about all this stuff lately that's going on?" And he responded, "No... what?" "Well," I said, "all the darn violence and people getting killed. That's what's bothering me, and I think it's a darned shame."

    (In the interest of full disclosure, I did not, in fact, use the word "darn" in the conversation. I used a similar word.)

    Anyhow, he had absolutely no response for that. I *know* what he was expecting me to say. Call me crazy, but I think people getting hurt and killed is, in fact, a very bad thing.

    Of course, I'm not militant about gun ownership. I'm darned responsible, but I'm not militant.
    03-28-2013 10:48 PM
  19. Aquila's Avatar
    To me, the entire 2nd amendment debate is another instance where both "sides" are 100% wrong in the rationality of their arguments. This happens because both sides want to use hyperbolic absolute black and white scenarios and assumptions, without ever taking the time to consider the actual pros and cons of a heavily armed civilian population. We've argued it in these forums quite a bit and I believe that we've seen most of the arguments for the spectrum of opinions, but the bottom line is this: If we attempt to make this a partisan issue or an emotional issue, then we will continue to reap only the benefits that we gain now from having a fear based discussion.

    The truth is there are a myriad of different issues to be resolved that people keep trying to lump into one concept of, "gun control".. trying to make a simple solution to many problems. At issue (not all inclusive) home defense, personal self defense in public, property rights, hunting, target shooting, defense against tyranny, what types of weapons, what types of ammo, limitations on stock, "gun free zones", responsible storage, culpability for accidents, culpability in shootings where the shooter is a minor, sale and transfer of weapons, sale and transfer of ammo, registration, permits to purchase, permits to carry, concealed carry, eligibility for purchasing, eligibility for ownership, background checks, information sharing (HIPAA, etc), gun insurance, safety training, minimum age to handle, minimum age to own, penalties for illegal possession, penalties for illegal use, penalties for lying on background checks, mental health strategies, the economic impact on social stress, the culture of violence, etc, etc, etc. That's over 30 different issues that are all interrelated and interdependent and each has a spectrum of opinions and legal precedents attached to them. Trying to make one law that covers all of these issues, other than "everything is legal" or "everything is illegal", will be ineffectual.

    To be clear, banning all weapons will not stop all violence. Lifting restrictions on weapons will increase violence. These are self-evident points. We as a society have the difficult task of trying to find a policy and agreement on how to balance liberty and public safety. To me, the most obvious answer is to after the causes of violence, thus lessening the need for defense... however we live in a society that is still trying to debate about whether science or theology should be the basis for our understanding of the universe.

    There is little hope of this issue being resolved, but I don't understand why that means no one is willing to try. The extremists on both sides need to calm down in a bad way. The fears of confiscation and armed revolt are ridiculous and fantastical... precisely the same amount of ridiculous as freaking out about 27 people being killed in one day, when that's exactly the amount of deaths to firearms we lose every day in this country (on average). I feel horrible for the parents of all of these children, and the families of the other 10,000 victims we'll lose this year.. but if that was my kid, I wouldn't be attacking guns; I'd be attacking the perpetrator and possibly the NRA (for their tactless encouragement of the rabid fear based gun culture during a time that should be spent focused on mourning and support). The culture is the problem... we celebrate violence and dominance over others and then cry when the expected results actually occur. Garbage in, garbage out.
    jdbii likes this.
    03-28-2013 11:16 PM
  20. jdbii's Avatar
    To me, the entire 2nd amendment debate is another instance where both "sides" are 100% wrong in the rationality of their arguments. This happens because both sides want to use hyperbolic absolute black and white scenarios and assumptions, without ever taking the time to consider the actual pros and cons of a heavily armed civilian population. We've argued it in these forums quite a bit and I believe that we've seen most of the arguments for the spectrum of opinions, but the bottom line is this: If we attempt to make this a partisan issue or an emotional issue, then we will continue to reap only the benefits that we gain now from having a fear based discussion.

    The truth is there are a myriad of different issues to be resolved that people keep trying to lump into one concept of, "gun control".. trying to make a simple solution to many problems. At issue (not all inclusive) home defense, personal self defense in public, property rights, hunting, target shooting, defense against tyranny, what types of weapons, what types of ammo, limitations on stock, "gun free zones", responsible storage, culpability for accidents, culpability in shootings where the shooter is a minor, sale and transfer of weapons, sale and transfer of ammo, registration, permits to purchase, permits to carry, concealed carry, eligibility for purchasing, eligibility for ownership, background checks, information sharing (HIPAA, etc), gun insurance, safety training, minimum age to handle, minimum age to own, penalties for illegal possession, penalties for illegal use, penalties for lying on background checks, mental health strategies, the economic impact on social stress, the culture of violence, etc, etc, etc. That's over 30 different issues that are all interrelated and interdependent and each has a spectrum of opinions and legal precedents attached to them. Trying to make one law that covers all of these issues, other than "everything is legal" or "everything is illegal", will be ineffectual.

    To be clear, banning all weapons will not stop all violence. Lifting restrictions on weapons will increase violence. These are self-evident points. We as a society have the difficult task of trying to find a policy and agreement on how to balance liberty and public safety. To me, the most obvious answer is to after the causes of violence, thus lessening the need for defense... however we live in a society that is still trying to debate about whether science or theology should be the basis for our understanding of the universe.

    There is little hope of this issue being resolved, but I don't understand why that means no one is willing to try. The extremists on both sides need to calm down in a bad way. The fears of confiscation and armed revolt are ridiculous and fantastical... precisely the same amount of ridiculous as freaking out about 27 people being killed in one day, when that's exactly the amount of deaths to firearms we lose every day in this country (on average). I feel horrible for the parents of all of these children, and the families of the other 10,000 victims we'll lose this year.. but if that was my kid, I wouldn't be attacking guns; I'd be attacking the perpetrator and possibly the NRA (for their tactless encouragement of the rabid fear based gun culture during a time that should be spent focused on mourning and support). The culture is the problem... we celebrate violence and dominance over others and then cry when the expected results actually occur. Garbage in, garbage out.
    Eloquently stated indeed. If you are not a High School History Teacher or College Professor (or Union Leader, State Rep, Journalist, Writer, or any other field that utilizes language arts skills like these) you should be.
    03-28-2013 11:51 PM
  21. Aquila's Avatar
    Eloquently stated indeed. If you are not a High School History Teacher or College Professor (or Union Leader, State Rep, Journalist, Writer, or any other field that utilizes language arts skills like these) you should be.
    Roffleymaiyo! (that's how my text to speech says ROFLMAO)

    Nope, my career path went: assistant martial arts instructor -> martial arts instructor -> martial arts school owner -> statistical analyst -> strategy analyst -> logistics analyst
    03-28-2013 11:54 PM
  22. jdbii's Avatar
    Roffleymaiyo! (that's how my text to speech says ROFLMAO)

    Nope, my career path went: assistant martial arts instructor -> martial arts instructor -> martial arts school owner -> statistical analyst -> strategy analyst -> logistics analyst
    Pretty cool route. Not sure if this is martial arts, but I enjoyed watching judo (on TV) during the London Olympics................even the use of that word "Roffleymaiyo" shows off langauge skills..............I had to look it up.
    03-29-2013 12:06 AM
  23. Aquila's Avatar
    Eloquently stated indeed. If you are not a High School History Teacher or College Professor (or Union Leader, State Rep, Journalist, Writer, or any other field that utilizes language arts skills like these) you should be.
    Actually, I think you're rather new to my style of posting... I write really long winded posts that no one reads
    03-29-2013 12:09 AM
  24. jdbii's Avatar
    Actually, I think you're rather new to my style of posting... I write really long winded posts that no one reads
    Yeah, I've only been around a month or so. I am not so sure when I can post and not. I sort of went crazy with Zombies because I am into that genre. But there's a couple posters around that I really enjoy like Tall Mike. I think the funniest post I saw was the Presidential Poll that Live2Ride883 started and he instructs -- "No need for anybody to post more than 6 words." Well that lasted for about 3 posts, and then here comes you and Tall Mike swooping in and breaking all the rules and all heck breaks loose. So much for the 6 word maximum request by LIve2Ride883.
    Aquila likes this.
    03-29-2013 12:22 AM
  25. Live2ride883's Avatar
    Honestly there are few people on ANY message board that I post on that I respect more than NIT. We do not agree on everything, actually we have differing views on a lot of things. But he always comes from a position of respect, and has never treated me in a disrespectful manner that I have noticed.

    Regardless if he thinks no one reads his posts or not I will admit here that sometimes I have to read them twice. As you've no doubt noticed some of my posts need a bit of translating especially when a topic such as gun control/abortion are being discussed. I tend to get a little animated and do not take the time for a deep breath.

    -------------------------

    I am gonna go off topic for just a minute, and I do apologize in advance and hope it's OK.

    I've been having a rough week, my friend Matt would have had a birthday earlier this week. Honestly I miss the sh;* out of him every day. I would gladly put a round through the head of James Holmes if only the state of CO would see clear to give him the death penalty. Now I hear his lawyers have offered a deal where he will plead guilty if they will agree to take the death penalty off the table.
    ------

    Rant over, sorry for hijacking the thread even if it is my own.
    Aquila likes this.
    03-29-2013 12:46 AM
4,617 ... 7172737475 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Larva Cartoon - FREE and FUNNY Application
    By liontyping in forum Android Apps
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-21-2014, 11:03 AM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 07:33 AM
  3. POI information and Gallery
    By robjulo in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 11:00 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 04:28 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD