Jan 24 - Dems Reintroduce ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban (and List Shows It’s Not Just Rifles):

most viewed right now
 123
Image(s) inside Chinx’s Killer attended his funeral!!!!!smh
114 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 121
Phat ass white girl for real
45 comments
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 117
Image(s) inside XXXTentacles facing 77 years in jail :niggaomg:
103 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 75
NBA Kobe Bryant legendary stories like when MJ yelled @ Mugsy shoot u f'n midg..
30 comments
@sports

section   (0 bx goons and 1 bystanders) Share this on Twitter   Share this on Facebook
 

Props Slaps
 5 years ago '11        #101
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 KFrizzle said:
that because owning a gun is a RIGHT...

much different that a privilege...




So you're saying who can have rights should be regulated? Privileges are taken away, not rights. Are you also for taking away the right of freedom of speech for convicted felons too?
 5 years ago '11        #102
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 614FACE said:


when u order a gun online it doesnt just show up to your house. you have to pick it up at your local gun dealer and you still have to go thru a background check. but youve never bought a gun and you clearly dont kno the laws or anything about guns thinkin that anybody could own a fully or comparing a civilian version to the fully automatic version. i think you need to inform yourself on these things bfore you start any arguements.

and just to give an example, until last month the worst mass shooting in america was done by the asian guy at vtech. he did that with 2 pistols, not rifles.

you seem like your feeding into the fear propaganda without any real knowledge of guns or gun laws. dont fall for that sh*t. inform yourself.
Not necessarily. It depends on whether it's a licensed dealer or a private sale.



For example, I go to armslist and purchase a gun from a private seller. All this seller does is ask to take a picture of your driver's license.



Or this one, he's even offering to ship it so you don't have to meet him



So yes, there are ways you can purchase guns online or in person without a background check. Many people like Google and Craigslist are cracking down on private sales, but that doesn't mean it can't get done.

And yes, the VT shooter used handguns he purchased online to commit a massacre. He had 11 magazines and chained the doors shut so nobody could escape. It took police 11 mins to respond. So essentially, he k!lled about 3 ppl per minute who couldn't escape. Now compare the 3 ppl he was able to k!ll per minute to the 12 ppl and 20 ppl the Aurora and Sandy Hook k!llers were able to in a minute.

So yes, a.ssault weapons still k!ll more people in less time. The difference between the Aurora, Sandy Hook, and VT shootings is police response time. If police were able to respond in a minute like they were in the Sandy and Aurora shootings, causalities would have been greatly decreased. Hell, if they was a system to notify the campus 2 hours earlier when the first bodies were found, causalities would have been greatly prevented.

The idea behind a.ssault weapons is not to eliminate tragedies, it's to limit the ease at which once can be committed. Nobody is saying you can't shoot up a place with a pistol. But why make it so they can k!ll 20 ppl per minute when it's in your power to limit to 3 ppl per min?


Last edited by Kadillac87; 01-24-2013 at 06:33 PM..
 5 years ago '06        #103
nightmare 429 heat pts429
space
avatar space
space
$13,073 | Props total: 37 37
this thread is hilarious!
 5 years ago '11        #104
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 614FACE said:
as far as shipping guns thats a matter of state (and federal) laws. within the same state maybe different, but its illegal to go across state lines with a gun (depending on state your going to and state laws) u cant just up and ship a gun to someone like its a letter (depending on state laws) it says that in the article you posted. i cant ship a person in california a AR 15 with a hi cap cmag without breaking state AND federal laws.

that aurora dude bought his guns legally and picked them up at a gun shop.also, it says so in the article you posted. which means he had to go thru a background check on all 4 firearms.

as far as the vt shooter the point i made is still valid and what you said even proves my point more. u dont need a.ssualt weapons to k!ll alot of people. all u need is an effective plan (as sick as it may sound). more type of sh*t like this will happen even if hi cap mags get banned. he couldve done the same exact thing with machetes and would get the same results except for having to hack himself to death.

banning a.ssault weapons are not gonna stop people who want to completely wreck sh*t. they'll just grab 2 handguns and chain the doors shut.
It's not illegal to ship a gun across state lines. It's only illegal if the person who you're shipping it to doesn't have a FFL. The problem with that is there's nobody regulating if the buyer has a FFL or if the FFL is expired or if that FFL belongs to that person. A seller can easily say he told me he had a FFL and I believed him.

You can also buy tons of ammunition online without raising a flag. That's how the Aurora shooter bought 3000 rounds online without anybody noticing. Probably how the VT shooter brought 15 mags without anybody noticing too.

Yes, you can k!ll a lot of people with handguns. You can k!ll a lot of people with a knife too. The time gets longer and longer the less lethal the weapon becomes. The longer the time it takes to commit a mass murder, the greater the chances of authorities arriving to minimize the damage. If the authorities were on the scene in 1 minute in VT, do you think he would have k!lled 30+ people with handguns?

It's all about minimizing risk, not eliminating it. You're making the argument that we should do nothing because we can't completely eliminate gun violence. I'm making the argument that we have the opportunity to save more life the weapon used is k!lling 3 ppl per minute vs 20 ppl per minute.


Last edited by Kadillac87; 01-24-2013 at 07:21 PM..
 5 years ago '05        #105
daliff89 1 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$13,412 | Props total: 45 45
Stop talking about things you don't know about..

You can't ship a gun unless you have an FFL yourself, you can't receive a gun in the mail unless you have an FFL

FFL stands for Federal Firearms License, but you're saying nobody regulates it?

You can't get one without a background check and proof that you have a place to sell the weapons

Please, please get the fu*k outta here
 5 years ago '11        #106
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 daliff89 said:
Stop talking about things you don't know about..

You can't ship a gun unless you have an FFL yourself, you can't receive a gun in the mail unless you have an FFL

FFL stands for Federal Firearms License, but you're saying nobody regulates it?

You can't get one without a background check and proof that you have a place to sell the weapons

Please, please get the fu*k outta here

Straight from the ATF website

Q: May a nonlicensee ship a firearm through the U.S. Postal Service?
A nonlicensee may not transfer a firearm to a non-licensed resident of another State. A nonlicensee may mail a shotgun or rifle to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. The Postal Service recommends that long guns be sent by registered mail and that no marking of any kind which would indicate the nature of the contents be placed on the outside of any parcel containing firearms. Handguns are not mailable. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun.
[18 U.S.C. 1715, 922(a)(3), 922(a)(5) and 922 (a)(2)(A)]

Q: May a nonlicensee ship a firearm by common or contract carrier?
A nonlicensee may ship a firearm by a common or contract carrier to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun. In addition, Federal law requires that the carrier be notified that the shipment contains a firearm and prohibits common or contract carriers from requiring or causing any label to be placed on any package indicating that it contains a firearm.
[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(2)(A), 922(a) (3), 922(a)(5) and 922(e), 27 CFR 478.31 and 478.30]




You were saying?
 5 years ago '05        #107
daliff89 1 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$13,412 | Props total: 45 45
I'm talking about a.ssault weapons, not hunting rifles chief
 5 years ago '11        #108
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 daliff89 said:
I'm talking about a.ssault weapons, not hunting rifles chief
Show me where it distinguished that on that ATF website? Maybe I overlooked it. I'm pretty sure you only need a license when it comes to fully auto. And as you guys have already pointed out, these a.ssault weapons are not fully auto.
 5 years ago '11        #109
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 614FACE said:
police aint never on time bruh. they always show up after the fact.

i never said we should'nt do something about it. but something should've been done cause certain muthafu*kaz dont need guns. all im saying is its not gonna do sh*t. criminals or "law abiding citizens" are still gonna get and have guns. a tougher background check is gonna force people to get guns off the street even if they are "law abiding citizens". you'd be suprise how many law abiding citizens get guns the fast way bcause they dont wanna go thru the background check.

its the crazy muthafu*kaz with guns are the problem. and they buy them legally. people with a background of mental illness, and when you go thru the background check it ask you if you have a history of mental illness. when they check NO they are breaking the law already, but if the law cant keep up with its own sh*t until after the fact wtf are "tougher" laws gonna do???

how the fu*k did these people get guns legally??? dude in conneticut k!lled his mom and used her guns. he was fu*ked up just like that dude at vtech... just like dude that shot the congress woman in arizona or some sh*t... just like dude in aurora...
Police showed up with a minute in both the Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings. That's a pretty fast response time. You can k!ll 20 ppl before anybody has a chance to stop you, that's the problem with the a.ssault weapons.

You keep saying the laws make it tougher on law abiding citizens as if most guns in crimes aren't purchased legally and then transferred illegally. If you can't stop the crazy people from getting guns, you can at least try to stop the most lethal weapons from falling into their hands.
 5 years ago '09        #110
ill 800 64 heat pts64
space
avatar space
space
$9,089 | Props total: 269 269
 Kadillac87 said:
Police showed up with a minute in both the Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings. That's a pretty fast response time. You can k!ll 20 ppl before anybody has a chance to stop you, that's the problem with the a.ssault weapons.

You keep saying the laws make it tougher on law abiding citizens as if most guns in crimes aren't purchased legally and then transferred illegally. If you can't stop the crazy people from getting guns, you can at least try to stop the most lethal weapons from falling into their hands.
and what happened at virginia tech again? i must have a terrible memory i tell ya...
 5 years ago '06        #111
KFrizzle 296 heat pts296 OP
space
avatar space
space
$5,859 | Props total: 143 143
 Kadillac87 said:
So you're saying who can have rights should be regulated? Privileges are taken away, not rights. Are you also for taking away the right of freedom of speech for convicted felons too?
Dude have you ever read the 2nd amendment ??

A well regulated milita....

The Founders knew we shouldn't have the mentally crazy or dangerous crimianls with weapons..


No, free speech shouldn't be regulated.
 5 years ago '06        #112
KFrizzle 296 heat pts296 OP
space
avatar space
space
$5,859 | Props total: 143 143
 ill 800 said:
and what happened at virginia tech again? i must have a terrible memory i tell ya...
He doesn't know that the gun man actually k!lled themselves once another gun was present...
Each time, they ended their own lives.. Didn't even shoot back... Or put up a f!ght..

If only there was a gun close by to start with...

Christ, dude picked that movie theater cuz of the gun free zone,.
And now the theater is gettting sued cuz of lack of security...

Not saying we shouldn't have gun free zones, but those zones may need more defense of some sort near by..
 5 years ago '11        #113
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 KFrizzle said:
Dude have you ever read the 2nd amendment ??

A well regulated milita....

The Founders knew we shouldn't have the mentally crazy or dangerous crimianls with weapons..


No, free speech shouldn't be regulated.
So are you making the case that anybody not in a well regulated militia shouldn't have the right to bear arms? The majority of America is not apart of a well regulated milita.

 5 years ago '06        #114
KFrizzle 296 heat pts296 OP
space
avatar space
space
$5,859 | Props total: 143 143
 Kadillac87 said:
So are you making the case that anybody not in a well regulated militia shouldn't have the right to bear arms? The majority of America is not apart of a well regulated milita.

Nope, I'm am not making that case..
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"...

And so you know.. There are a lot of those who qualify as "militia"

US code Title 10 sect. 311-313
Militia is defined as: "all able-bodied males (lol) from 17-45 and members of the Nat. Gaurd up to 64, but excluding those who have no intention of becoming a citizens and active military personnel"


Last edited by KFrizzle; 01-24-2013 at 10:58 PM..
 5 years ago '11        #115
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 KFrizzle said:
Nope, I'm am not making that case..
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"...

And so you know.. There are a lot of those who qualify as "militia"

US code Title 10 sect. 311-313
Militia is defined as: "all able-bodied males (lol) from 17-45 and members of the Nat. Gaurd up to 64, but excluding those who have no intention of becoming a citizens and active military personnel"
Well that right has already been infringed. Convicted felons can't get guns. People with a mental illness can't get guns. People under the age of 18 can't get them. Tell me what other right in the Bill of Rights can be taken away from you and doesn't kick in when you become an American citizen?

So are you saying convicted felons are not able-bodied males? Are people in wheelchairs barred from having guns now? Women too?



Last edited by Kadillac87; 01-24-2013 at 11:01 PM..
 5 years ago '04        #116
Menace718 1 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$5,611 | Props total: 722 722
Thanks for posting the list, now I can have my shopping list to go off of. Got my pistol permit
 5 years ago '06        #117
KFrizzle 296 heat pts296 OP
space
avatar space
space
$5,859 | Props total: 143 143
Ya they can't so the milita can be regulated, haha
Trusted, safe, etc..

I had a 22 when I was 12, maybe even 10. Lol..

Whose trina to take away rights??
Oh wait the the dems are doin that now... War on guns.. How could I have forgotten lol
 5 years ago '07        #118
Ham Rove 3511 heat pts3511
space
avatar space
space
$55,231 | Props total: 20013 20013
 KFrizzle said:
Ya they can't so the milita can be regulated, haha
Trusted, safe, etc..

I had a 22 when I was 12, maybe even 10. Lol..

Whose trina to take away rights??
Oh wait the the dems are doin that now... War on guns.. How could I have forgotten lol

can only laugh at this sh*t now.
 5 years ago '11        #119
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 KFrizzle said:
Ya they can't so the milita can be regulated, haha
Trusted, safe, etc..

I had a 22 when I was 12, maybe even 10. Lol..

Whose trina to take away rights??
Oh wait the the dems are doin that now... War on guns.. How could I have forgotten lol

[pic - click to view]




(Page 2 of 2)
Ford, Carter, Reagan Push for Gun Ban
May 05, 1994|WILLIAM J. EATON | TIMES STAFF WRITER
Email
Share


Sen. Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.), sponsor of a previous a.ssault-weapons ban that passed the Senate but died in the House, said police organizations will deserve the credit if the bill succeeds in the House this time around.

"This is the time for the House to take the political risk and do the right thing," DeConcini said. "There is political life if you vote against the NRA."


Plea From 3 Ex-Presidents

The letter from three former presidents to the House:

May 3, 1994

To Members of the U.S. House of Representatives:

We are writing to urge your support for a ban on the domestic manufacture of military-style a.ssault weapons. This is a matter of vital importance to the public safety. Although a.ssualt weapons account for less than 1% of the guns in circulation, they account for nearly 10% of the guns traced to crime.

Every major law enforcement organization in America and dozens of leading labor, medical, religious, civil rights and civic groups support such a ban. Most importantly, poll after poll shows that the American public overwhelmingly support a ban on a.ssault weapons. A 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 77% of Americans support a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of semi-automatic a.ssault guns, such as the AK-47.

The 1989 import ban resulted in an impressive 40% drop in imported a.ssault weapons traced to crime between 1989 and 1991, but the k!lling continues. Last year, a k!ller armed with two TEC9s k!lled eight people at a San Francisco law firm and wounded several others. During the past five years, more than 40 law enforcement officers have been k!lled or wounded in the line of duty by an a.ssault weapon.

While we recognize that a.ssault weapon legislation will not stop all a.ssault weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals. We urge you to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of these weapons.

Sincerely,

Gerald R. Ford

Jimmy Carter

Ronald Reagan



Last edited by Kadillac87; 01-24-2013 at 11:31 PM..
 5 years ago '06        #120
KFrizzle 296 heat pts296 OP
space
avatar space
space
$5,859 | Props total: 143 143
Reagan owned an AR-15



I think in 94' dude was mentally gone, idk maybe not that soon
Home      
  
 

 






most viewed right now
 42
Black thought freestyles on funk flex | #freestyle087
160 comments
2 days ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 26
Image(s) inside Thread worthy Cute thick Latina
29 comments
2 days ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 20
Image(s) inside Houston Better Stop Playing With Me 😩
58 comments
2 days ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 13
Some confused X Men actors think they won't be Recast :mjlol:
207 comments
2 days ago
@movies
most viewed right now
 12
Image(s) inside Lawyer with big ass t1ttys
113 comments
2 days ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 9
When You Catch The Homie Wearin Fake Red 11s
20 comments
2 days ago
@gear
most viewed right now
 9
Image(s) inside T1tty Meat from Nicki Minaj
51 comments
2 days ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 7
Lil Duval with the joke of the year
60 comments
2 days ago
@wild'ish
back to top
register contact Follow BX @ Twitter Follow BX @ Facebook search BX privacy