1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice
Like RaceDepartment on Facebook.

This is what my founding fathers had in mind....

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Diego Lopez, Jan 29, 2013.

  1. so sad to live here...makes me want to leave planet Earth.

    Great example of the society in my country

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e06_1359380173

    can anyone tell me what "chikenyell" is ? @0:55.

    anyone elses thoughts on this? I hope this ain't happening just in the U.S :thumbsdown:
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. LOL oh man I needed that. When he hits her with the tazer and she FLOPS...magical. Some people have it comin.

    Remember parents, if you don't teach your kids respect someone on the street will. And if not they'll get it in prison. =)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Hiroshi Awazu

    Hiroshi Awazu
    Off Topic Moderator

    Act a Fool, Get treated as a Fool or Act Like a Guy, Get Treated Like a Guy ;)

    Kinda feel bad for the kids being raised around the kind of attitude the mom is throwing out. Perhaps 5/10 years from now the next YouTube video will probably be of one with one of the kids getting tasered.
     
  4. lol yeah.
     
  5. Hijacking your thread Diego hope you don't mind =) This man understands the intent of the Founding Fathers. This man is a patriot.



    Bill Stevens for President!
     
  6. Um, wait, that's a positive thing? Frankly, I find him a bit disturbing.
     
  7. If you find a man willing to give his life for his children disturbing then yes.

    There are still people in this country willing to fight for their rights, freedoms and safety of their families. I applaud Bill Stevens for being one of them.
     
  8. Saying you'll get his weapons from his cold, dead hands, and banging on the table, yes, quite disturbing. But to each his own I guess. Best of luck.
     
  9. Don't paraphrase him, you take all the emphasis and emotion out of it and spin him as a gun zealot. (you don't work or Fox do you? XD)

    The full quote is:
    "Charles Heston made the phrase cold dead hands famous. I'm here to tell you that you will take MY ability to defend MY VICTORIA from my cold, dead, hands."

    That's a Father protecting his means to protect his daughter. I know my Father would risk his life for mine, I hope yours would too.

    Do you live in a country that's already been disarmed by any chance Senad? I would understand your feelings if you live in a place where you don't even have the option of owning a gun to protect your loved ones.
     
  10. Isn't Fox pro guns?

    In any case, I don't see that much difference in those sentences, and I see him as a zealot.
    A bunch of studies and statistics show that guns in the house are not the brightest idea. Common sense to me says that guns in the house are not the brightest idea. But a zealot sticks with what he believes, despite any and all evidence or common sense, and bangs on the table. The person in that video is disturbing to me.

    Not sure how that is related to guns? I guess I have to be an American.

    I don't want a random fat shmuck carrying a gun around to defend their family. He'd shoot himself or someone else before defending anyone.



    Just the opposite, a war 20 years ago, plenty of guns still in private hands, assault rifles and all. Just not a gun culture I guess. Nobody is carrying guns around, no major firearm incidents.


    Also, wait, nobody is disarming you? As far as I'm aware, they just want to ban assault rifles and the like, and introduce more background checks?
     
  11. On Fox I'm not sure I don't watch or read anything that comes out of the Murdoch Propagsnda empire I honestly don't know where they stand on the issue.

    If you read the legalese of Feinsteins bill it bans everything with a detatchable mag and one other military style feature, among of which is a pistol grip. So TECHNICALLY speaking everything other than bolt action rifles, pump shotguns and single action revolvers are banned.

    It's a deceptive way to begin disarmament, They'll start by changing the definition of an Assault rifle and take the rifles, then they'll clarify the wording to include ALL semi auto, then when all we have are 6 shooters they'll go for those too.

    Let me throw a hypothetical at you. Your government runs the numbers and sees DUIs are a massive problem so the government decides a car is too dangerous to be left in the hands of civilians, from now on only approved public transportation is allowed to be used and to do so you have to register yourself and carry around a public transport permit. Failure to give your government your car at 1/8th its cost will brand you a criminal.

    Do you objectively trust the government has your best interest at heart and give up your car and privacy to them?
     
  12. That's just TECHNICALLY not true.

    Are you expecting a platoon of gun wielding thugs to attack your house? Why such drama over high capacity magazines and military style features, when it might help reduce the number of people killed?

    I'm gonna slowly back away now, without making direct eye contact, my hands are in the open, everything will be okay.

    LOL, great hypothetical, you might've as well used drinking water, it would've made the same amount of sense.

    There is little point continuing on. You have fun.
     
  13. 'Assault rifles' as in what the military use, ie fully automatic, are already banned in the US except under the most stringent of circumstances...
    What the government there is seeking to do is use that term for semi-automatic firearms that cosmetically look like military firearms...
    But, the way the legislation is worded that can quiet easily be misconstrued by the law courts, solicitors & police agencies to be ANY type of long arm.
    For those in the USA my advice is to learn from the Australian experience of 'Gun Control'...
    Buy up anything you can now & the moment these laws are rammed through as they surely will be, bury them in vacuumed sealed PVC tubes & tell no-one anything!
    Sure we can still have some firearms after jumping through hoops & being tangled up & tied down in red tape but it also means that us firearm owners now must let police in at any time for 'spot inspections' & if you happen to be cleaning you guns when you answer the door to them & leave it for but a few seconds, then you'll find yourself in court.
    If criminals come in & destroy half your house removing your gunsafe tearing it out of the floor or prizing it from the wall then your in court under the same charges, NOT the criminals.
    But to top it off, we're not even allowed to have then for self defense & if criminals come for you guns & you happen to be at home, you have to ring the police & wait several hours for them to come around by which time your guns will be gone & if your not a candidate for a chalk outline, then you'll end up in court.
    Meanwhile, more & more guns are coming into the country illegally & more & more people are being shot with them while law-abiding shooters are being made scape-goats & being punished for it.
    Trust me, when all guns are finally banned to stop these crimes it'll only be the governments representatives & criminals that have guns.
    When governments wish to disarm their citizens it can only lead to trouble, after all, look at what happened in Germany & Cambodia...
    They were only able to commit those genocides & atrocities because they first disarmed their citizens & they're not the only times or places where it's happened!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Senad did you bother to read the regulation you quoted about the bill? You pretty much proved my point. Find me a semi auto handgun that only has 1 feature on that list.

    What's the harm in a hypothetical? Scared to answer? ARs account for 1 in 100 gun deaths, banning ARs is not the solution to the problem such as banning cars is not the solution for DUIs.

    If I were a dictator I'd want a country full of Senads. Unarmed and unquestioning to any ridiculous laws I felt like passing.

    Btw lee nailed it. If I wasnt on my phone I would've written a little more and provided links.
     
  15. I don't do guns, sorry, but isn't any semi-automatic pistol fine? Pistol grip kinda means rifles/shotguns with a pistol grip.

    No, it was just plain stupid.

    Who cares about random people shooting each other, this is so random psychos don't kill too many people too easy.

    You should be featured on the Colbert Report.
     
  16. You take away everyone's guns and the only ones who have them are criminals. Having no guns around will make it easier for psychos to kill MORE people. If you think a psycho takes the law into consideration before their killing sprees I dunno what to tell you but I hope you never have a gun pulled on you because the criminal won't care his gun has over 10 bullets and wont wait for you to dial 911.
     
  17. I assume you've now realized that any semi-automatic pistol is fine then? Good.

    Unfortunately, you seem to have gone back to "they're taking away all our guns!1!1!!" mode somehow.

    They are not taking away your guns. They are banning high capacity magazines, and military style features. If you are only interested in protecting yourself and your family, what do you have against that?

    You also don't seem to realize that it's not about psychos taking law into consideration at all. It's about banning things that enable them to kill dozens of innocent people. Things that normal people like yourself (a bit of a stretch there, I admit) don't need.
    It's not done overnight, it's about systematically removing those things from the country, or at least making them much harder to acquire in the long run.
     
  18. You underestimate the black market. If you have a computer and money you can get whatever gun you want mailed to you. And it's not exclusive to a computer, you have the right connections pY can buy ANYTHING. Did you know there's 2 nukes unaccounted for and at least one of those was sold privately? Theres a documentary about it I could dig it up later if you'd like to see it.

    My semi auto 1911 has:
    A. A pistol grip
    B. detatchable magazines.

    Show me where in the bill my handgun is exempt because according to the definition above its an assault weapon. If you look carefully theres a clause of 900 exempt shotguns and rifles, handguns are suspiciously absent. Intentional?
     
  19. LOL, should've known, speaking to an American after all.

    Okay, let's try again. The pistol grip in question is not the default pistol grip on your pistol. It refers to an extra pistol grip on your pistol, or a pistol grip on a shotgun, or a rifle. Otherwise your NRA folk would be pointing at pistols and saying "omg, they banned pistols", instead of pointing at shotguns and holding pistol grips next to them.

    It's sad that I seem to understand your proposed laws better than you. But you keep fighting for your rights man!
     

  20. "Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm "overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose." Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines "overwhelmingly chosen" by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein's list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection."

    http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2013/stop-the-gun-ban.aspx

    The NRA is aware and this is one of the reasons this bill is circling the toilet bowl at the moment as it should.

    If you were taking a common sense approach to the law you would be absolutely correct in assuming the pistol grip ONLY applies to a forward grip but that's not what it says is it? It says "pistol-grip" it does not specify forward or aft and these are the semantics that get abused in my legal system. As it's written you're correct that it's still legal. But with "pistol-grip" defined as "(46) The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumb-hole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip" That will be used and abused on any semi rifle you can imagine. Handguns are next.

    Yes I am American.
    Yes I will fight for my rights.
    Rights you apparently never had or cared for.