The Attack on the 2nd Amendment Continues

pete2800 said:
You could... One potential problem with this idea is that you'd likely just be creating a desire for aftermarket mods/products to remove that function. Modern cars are a good example. With the emissions and equipment laws that are in place everywhere, there is a massive market for parts and service that serve to bypass the emission standards in the pursuit of performance. You can set up testing, but the enthusiast with the dyno tuner and the manual boost controller is going to make power and burn the gas anyway... If we're looking for control-ability, consistency of operation, and safety... simplicity is usually the best way to get there.
Click to expand...
just ask Volkswagen.
 
Seggy said:
Oh they are.

But the pro gun control folks haven't been as organized as they are now.
Click to expand...

Clearly you missed the 80's, 90's and early 2000's.

But, that assault weapons ban was really something. Just cleaned gun crime right out. See how there were no shootings in the early 2000's? Back then I used to let my kids play kickball in the street in Camden.

Ahh those were the days.


Lol "the long game" and devide and conquer? Wth do you think this is? News flash. Those who control the money in the government want guns. The Republican Party will do everything they can to squash gun control. Maintaining, or even achieving and amount of control will require more negotiating leverage than the Dems are willing to spend.

Every measure Obama tried to push through failed.

I'm guessing the Giants season this year was also the "long game" gearing up for a win in 2020, because right now is a waste
 
Last edited:
jtrain609 said:
I've gotta tell you, if you've never met @Seggy, you have no idea how one sided that fight would be. He's "winners lose their arms" big.
Click to expand...

One thing I learned from the DIs in unarmed combat training, it doesn't matter how big a person is, it's how cold blooded, viciously mean a person is. Seggy is more a "Let me make you a sammich and clean your house for you," not, "imma gut you like a hog and wear your skin like a cape."
 
bike21 said:
Sure, but that misses the mark on readiness to the point of absurdity. Where do ya'll hang out each day that being the quickest of draws is gonna save your life?
Click to expand...
Oh I don't know. Maybe a movie theatre in Colorado. Perhaps in a diner in San Antonio. Maybe a convenience store paying for my Red Bull, I'm not normally allowed to drink.

You know, I'd really like to know when I need my gun and when I don't. That would be just super.
 
Cptnchia said:
One thing I learned from the DIs in unarmed combat training, it doesn't matter how big a person is, it's how cold blooded, viciously mean a person is. Seggy is more a "Let me make you a sammich and clean your house for you," not, "imma gut you like a hog and wear your skin like a cape."
Click to expand...

I agree with your DI, which is why I'd still bet on @Seggy, and @amorris311 too for that matter.

Don't let the Internet fool you.
 
jtrain609 said:
I agree with your DI, which is why I'd still bet on @Seggy, and @amorris311 too for that matter.

Don't let the Internet fool you.
Click to expand...
I'm not fooled by the Internet, but you might be about me. Don't let my jovial attitude here fool you. However, if you want an unbiased opinion, there is one person here though that does know us both.
 
Cptnchia said:
I'm not fooled by the Internet, but you might be about me. Don't let my jovial attitude here fool you. However, if you want an unbiased opinion, there is one person here though that does know us both.
Click to expand...

Don't know a thing about you other than the fact that you drove an M-16 and work at SJA.
 
Cptnchia said:
One thing I learned from the DIs in unarmed combat training, it doesn't matter how big a person is, it's how cold blooded, viciously mean a person is. Seggy is more a "Let me make you a sammich and clean your house for you," not, "imma gut you like a hog and wear your skin like a cape."
Click to expand...

You obviously aren't that familiar with my past.
 
pete2800 said:
You could...

One potential problem with this idea is that you'd likely just be creating a desire for aftermarket mods/products to remove that function. Modern cars are a good example. With the emissions and equipment laws that are in place everywhere, there is a massive market for parts and service that serve to bypass the emission standards in the pursuit of performance. You can set up testing, but the enthusiast with the dyno tuner and the manual boost controller is going to make power and burn the gas anyway...

If we're looking for control-ability, consistency of operation, and safety... simplicity is usually the best way to get there.
Click to expand...

I am sure folks can solve these potential problems.
 
Hacker15e said:
So long as we don't have the predetermined outcome that previous CDC officials stated was the objective, then there would be no issue.

Instead, CDC officials publicly stated that their goals in research were to "systematically build a case against firearms."

As soon as the intent is to be objective and let the findings follow the research -- like Galileo or Copernicus would -- then you'll see this kind of thing go away.
Click to expand...

You and your gun lovers used the same tactics used in fighting the CDC reports that Big Tobacco used...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/31/nra-guns-tobacco-research/1859385/

How did that work out for Big Tobacco?

Tides are a turning!
 
Seggy said:
I am sure folks can solve these potential problems.
Click to expand...

Yeah right after they invent a technology that hasn't worked despite billions of dollars worth of incentive to do it....

Just like microstamping. A boondoggle "common sense measure" invented to serve no purpose but restrict access to firearms by all citizens not just criminals.
 
Lawman said:
Yeah right after they invent a technology that hasn't worked despite billions of dollars worth of incentive to do it....

Just like microstamping. A boondoggle "common sense measure" invented to serve no purpose but restrict access to firearms by all citizens not just criminals.
Click to expand...

Stop being so dramatic, citizens have firearms restricted ALL the time. Can every citizen bring a gun on an airplane?
 
Seggy said:
Stop being so dramatic, citizens have firearms restricted ALL the time. Can every citizen bring a gun on an airplane?
Click to expand...

So what you want is to make us all safe like "trigger locks" being required to be installed on all firearms in DC. Yeah that was found unconstitutional.

You aren't talking about putting biometrics on guns so we can take them places. You are talking about requiring a technology that doesn't actually exist and cannot be demonstrated reliably in a way to get any of the state's demanding its implementation to work.

I'd love a judge dredd gun safety that lets me and my family use it and nobody else. But the tech doesn't exist. Simply making a law to say it has too despite nearly 40 years and tens of millions of dollars trying to make it work in a proof of concept doesn't change that.

You just want it because like everything else it will prevent people from owning guns legally that otherwise would of. Fulfilling your paranoid fantasy of people being disarmed so you can feel a little safer while you hold yourself at night and worry about the guns you didn't/couldn't stop.
 
Lawman said:
So what you want is to make us all safe like "trigger locks" being required to be installed on all firearms in DC. Yeah that was found unconstitutional.

No

[quoteYou aren't talking about putting biometrics on guns so we can take them places. You are talking about requiring a technology that doesn't actually exist and cannot be demonstrated reliably in a way to get any of the state's demanding its implementation to work.
Click to expand...

So naive.

The internet is what, about 25 years old? Ever hear that technology evolves overtime?

I'd love a judge dredd gun safety that lets me and my family use it and nobody else. But the tech doesn't exist. Simply making a law to say it has too despite nearly 40 years and tens of millions of dollars trying to make it work in a proof of concept doesn't change that.

You just want it because like everything else it will prevent people from owning guns legally that otherwise would of. Fulfilling your paranoid fantasy of people being disarmed so you can feel a little safer while you hold yourself at night and worry about the guns you didn't/couldn't stop.
Click to expand...

I want to make firearms safer. Don't you? If you really are a law abiding individual why do you care if the right person shoots a gun?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top