# 2nd Amendment



## EZmoney (May 13, 2004)

*The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. . . . waiting for attack!*

*The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental. *

*1. Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you. *

*2. If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck. *

*3. I carry a gun cause a cop is too heavy. *

*4. When seconds count, the cops are just minutes away. *

*5. A reporter did a human-interest piece on the Texas Rangers. The reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 the Ranger was carrying and asked him 'Why do you carry a ..45?' The Ranger responded, 'Because they don't make a .46.' *

*6. The old sheriff was attending an awards dinner when a lady commented on his wearing his sidearm. 'Sheriff, I see you have your pistol. Are you expecting trouble?' 'No Ma'am. If I were expecting trouble, I would have brought my rifle.' *

*7. Beware the man who only has one gun. HE PROBABLY KNOWS HOW TO USE IT!!! *

*But wait, there's more! *

*I was once asked by a lady visiting if I had a gun in the house. I said I did. *
*She said 'Well I certainly hope it isn't loaded!' *
*To which I said, of course it is loaded, can't work without bullets!' *
*She then asked, 'Are you that afraid of someone evil coming into your house?' *
*My reply was, 'No not at all. I am not afraid of the house catching fire either, but I have fire extinguishers around, and they are all loaded too.' *
*To which I'll add, having a gun in the house that isn't loaded is like having a car in the garage without gas in the tank. *


----------



## ...Jay... (Nov 2, 2006)

:laugh: Thats pretty good. hehehe


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

gamgenius said:


> *The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. . . . waiting for attack!**
> 
> The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental.
> 
> ...


your the type of guy that gets called on his bullshit then all of a sudden turns into a Christian and wants to talk about it







.. I'm just saying with all this tough guy nipple sauce, I've known many that try and live by the same delusion and when the sh*t hits the fan all of a sudden they turn into rodney king, gun or not if you need one to get a hard on you better have the balls to back it up and quickly


----------



## Guest (Dec 6, 2008)




----------



## Guest (Dec 6, 2008)




----------



## FuZZy (Apr 18, 2003)

Sigmund Freud: "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

Admiral Yamamoto: "You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."

Israeli Police Inspector General Shlomo Aharonisky: "There's no question that weapons in the hands of the public have prevented acts of terror or stopped them."


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

im often found pondering the question, if staunch second amendment supporters are so into the constitution, why do most of the ones i talk with support the patriot act?


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

Personally, I've never met a firearms enthusiast who liked the Patriot act. That's one of the few things liberals and I can agree on.









Speaking of the 2nd Amendment, anybody else notice how Obama getting elected and the Senate getting taken over by Democrats has resulted in gun sales going through the roof? Kind of ironic how the election of (generally) anti-gun politicians has kicked the sale of guns into high gear.


----------



## mori0174 (Mar 31, 2004)

Piranha Dan said:


> Personally, I've never met a firearms enthusiast who liked the Patriot act. That's one of the few things liberals and I can agree on.:laugh:
> Speaking of the 2nd Amendment, anybody else notice how Obama getting elected and the Senate getting taken over by Democrats has resulted in gun sales going through the roof? Kind of ironic how the election of (generally) anti-gun politicians has kicked the sale of guns into high gear.


It is mostly because they will probably reinstitute the assault weapon and hi-cap magazine ban. That's my guess at least.


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

r1dermon said:


> im often found pondering the question, if staunch second amendment supporters are so into the constitution, why do most of the ones i talk with support the patriot act?


I've never met a pro-gunner that supports the patriot act.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

mori0174 said:


> It is mostly because they will probably reinstitute the assault weapon and hi-cap magazine ban. That's my guess at least.


Yea, that's pretty much the reason I keep hearing. Sucks for me because I've been putting off purchasing a AR-15 forever and now that I have the cash everybody's quoting me 15-20 week lead times.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

fear.


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

Guns?

Dont those things kill people?

Ya, I dont think anyone should have guns, including cops.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

"If guns kill people, I can blame misspelled words on my pencil."
--Larry The Cable Guy


----------



## fishguy1313 (Feb 19, 2007)

Ex0dus said:


> Guns?
> 
> Dont those things kill people?
> 
> Ya, I dont think anyone should have guns, including cops.


guns don't kill people... people kill people.

i've heard when obama gets in the white house, gun prices are going to go through the roof. this is why people are buying them left and right. taxes on guns are going to be the cost of the gun.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

fear.


----------



## sick fish man (Mar 21, 2006)

if there were no guns no one could shoot anyone else. end of story.


----------



## scrubbs (Aug 9, 2003)

Piranha Dan said:


> Personally, I've never met a firearms enthusiast who liked the Patriot act. That's one of the few things liberals and I can agree on.:laugh:
> Speaking of the 2nd Amendment, anybody else notice how Obama getting elected and the Senate getting taken over by Democrats has resulted in gun sales going through the roof? Kind of ironic how the election of (generally) anti-gun politicians has kicked the sale of guns into high gear.


it is also pretty well known that gun sales go up when the economy goes down. 
And gee, guess what has gone down in the last 4 months?


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

r1dermon said:


> Guns?
> 
> Dont those things kill people?
> 
> Ya, I dont think anyone should have guns, including cops.


guns don't kill people... people kill people.

i've heard when obama gets in the white house, gun prices are going to go through the roof. this is why people are buying them left and right. taxes on guns are going to be the cost of the gun.
[/quote]

Through the roof? You mean like now how a ar15 that 3 months ago was @ $1200 is now selling for $2250+? Or an ak that was @ $300 thats now selling for @ $700?

Im joking about the guns killing people bit. I am a huge proponent of peoples right to bear arms.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

That's exactly what I'm talking about^^
You can't find anything nice for under $1000 around here. The best thing I've actually seen in the last month was this absolutely horrible looking AKM. Missmatched stock pieces, scratches all over the metalwork, generaly looked like somebody'd ran it over with a car a few times, and the guy wanted $1200 for it. Sick thing is, I went back there a few days later and sombody'd actually bought it for that price.


sick fish man said:


> if there were no guns no one could shoot anyone else. end of story.


Then we'd have to resort to stabbing each other with knives and braining each other with clubs and rocks. Human nature is what it is dude. Even if, by some miracle, you managed to git rid of every firearm on the planet, you wouldn't stop people who want to kill from killing.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Takes so much more commitment and raw hatred to beat someone to death with a club. 
Gun is just: flex one finger and anothers life is erased. 
People will never stop killing each other, but when its easy to do, im going to bet it happens more often.

Im not trying to say we should take guns away or I think they ever will, just making a point that while people do kill people, not guns killing people, the ability to shoot someone in a fit of anger (and possibly miss and kill someone else) only comes with guns, not any other comperable instrument.

I just think that there should be heavy gun control, to limit the amount of assholes who can kill at will&#8230;. I don't think there is any argument that people are stupid, by and large. Control guns like we control tobacco and booze like we control vehicles. Im not advocating controlling anything else, so to say "where will it end?" is such a tired, paranoid argument. Just control the things that can enable someone to hurt someone else. 
If you are sane, and willing to jump through some hoops to prove you arent a criminal, then you should be able to have access to guns.


----------



## JD7.62 (Apr 7, 2005)

Nick G said:


> Takes so much more commitment and raw hatred to beat someone to death with a club.
> Gun is just: flex one finger and anothers life is erased.
> People will never stop killing each other, but when its easy to do, im going to bet it happens more often.
> 
> ...


Last time I checked achohol, tobacco and vehicles werent protected in our Bill of Rights.









I love how R1 pretends to be a 2nd Amendment supportor and real gun owner...







News flash R1, dont think Barry isnt going to grab guns, look at Shitcago.


----------



## Moondemon (Dec 9, 2006)

Nick G said:


> Takes so much more commitment and raw hatred to beat someone to death with a club.
> Gun is just: flex one finger and anothers life is erased.
> People will never stop killing each other, but when its easy to do, im going to bet it happens more often.
> 
> ...


I totally agree with you Nick !!


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

JD7.62 said:


> Last time I checked achohol, tobacco and vehicles werent protected in our Bill of Rights.


point being?

i just want a rational reason from someone against gun control other than holding out the 2nd amendment like its a badge. 
feels like there is EVERY reason for gun control, so many well thought out and logical arguments for it, but then the other side is "its my right"


----------



## khmerboiRED (Jul 15, 2008)

Ex0dus said:


> Guns?
> 
> Dont those things kill people?
> 
> Ya, I dont think anyone should have guns, including cops.


ACTUALLY... i'm sure you and many other people heard the saying... "Guns don't kill people, People kill People." Sure a gun can cause death. But it takes a person to pull that trigger. I mean I don't agree people should be walking around with guns on them. But i do believe that a person should be able to keep a gun at his/her household. Not only for the fear of Tyranny or Oppression, but the risk of people breaking in also. There's *ALOT* of crazy people out there. Better safe than sorry IMO.


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

Nick G said:


> Takes so much more commitment and raw hatred to beat someone to death with a club.
> Gun is just: flex one finger and anothers life is erased.
> People will never stop killing each other, but when its easy to do, im going to bet it happens more often.
> 
> ...


So why shouldn't people be able to protect themselves from others? There's a million reasons why someone would need a firearm against even someone that's unarmed. Take for instance the elderly, who generally aren't physically able to defend themselves. Or even a healthy middle aged man against multiple attackers.

Face it, there are bad people out there and everyone should be able to defend themselves if they so choose. The point of a gun is to be able to "flex one finger and anothers life is erased". Because not all life is precious, some of it is just a waste of dna.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

i totally agree with you scrappy but what i said wasnt "no guns" just: keep guns in the hands of those who are mentally stable and who dont have a history of violent crime.
only through control of guns can we attempt to keep guns out of idiots hands. Im not naive enough to think that there isnt a black market for guns to anyone who wants one, but the presence of a black market doesnt mean we dont need to attempt to control them.


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

That system is already in place. Felons and certified wackos can't own firearms.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Scrappy said:


> That system is already in place. Felons and certified wackos can't own firearms.


more or less that depends on where you are with the amount of screening. 
cant you just go to a gun show and buy a gun like, almost no questions asked? no holding period, or do i have that wrong.


----------



## Plowboy (Apr 9, 2008)

It's not realistic to think that putting laws in place will do anything besides keep the already honest people honest.

There will always be a market for anyone to get a gun. just like there is for pot now, alcohol during prohibition, and a black market for organs.

but hey, if they actually figure out a satisfactory way to take care of those markets i will gladly give up my firearms even tho im a strong believer of "God created people, but Sam Colt made them equal"


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Scrappy said:


> Takes so much more commitment and raw hatred to beat someone to death with a club.
> Gun is just: flex one finger and anothers life is erased.
> People will never stop killing each other, but when its easy to do, im going to bet it happens more often.
> 
> ...


So why shouldn't people be able to protect themselves from others? There's a million reasons why someone would need a firearm against even someone that's unarmed. Take for instance the elderly, who generally aren't physically able to defend themselves. Or even a healthy middle aged man against multiple attackers.

Face it, there are bad people out there and everyone should be able to defend themselves if they so choose. The point of a gun is to be able to "flex one finger and anothers life is erased". Because not all life is precious, some of it is just a waste of dna.
[/quote]

yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..







A wise man once said "Talk about death enough, death is gonna come", well walk around all day toying with the idea of one day having to kill somebody and sooner or later you'll bring trouble upon yourself. Gaurendamtee 90% of the wanna be's on here don't have what it takes anyway. I can't for a second fathom the idea of living a life constantly toying with a prelude to a situation that would leave you worse off regardless of the outcome. For entertainment?







retards need to find another hobby, lifes to short to walk around entertaining yourself with feeling threatened.

Sort of like the wanna be tough guys I'd see come into the gym all the time, never actually interested in the sport, don't want to listen to sh*t because they're know it all tough guys. They'd put a woopin on a punching bag, look good doing it, get cocky and think their hot sh*t. Put em in the ring with an actual fighter and all those delusions went right back into their asshole. Show me a person that actually looks foward to being a killer and I'll show you the biggest p*ssy of them all.. You want to be a killer? Real killers don't hesitate when threatened or not, chances are you will. And if you do get lucky you're still fucked. Why not live a humble life, enjoy the ones you love and surround yourselves with good people. Then maybe you won't have to walk around all day worrying about what you would do if some "bad guy" decided to bend you over







f*cking idiots. Hey look boys I got camo on while walking through walmart, the f*cking clerk can't see me so I'm a bonified killer







WOOOOOOOOOOO!


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

Nick G said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Who said anything about wanting to kill any one in this thread....

You truly are a moron to the worst degree. You make ASSumptions based on sh*t you read in some liberal rag.

You must be one of them true tough guys you speak of, huh?


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Gun control is extensive background checks, smart gun technology once its reasonable, waiting periods for guns, one gun a month per person, shut down some of the loopholes that are out there that allow people to get legal guns easier. Also stricter penalties for those selling guns illegally.

i dunno, i never researched what is possible, to be honest, i never really think about guns, except nerf guns, speaking of which, im getting that new one that is belt fed, shoots two darts per second, battery powered either tonight or tomorrow night, whichever i get out shopping.

I figure if someone is going to shoot me, then me having a gun wont help much. Once i buy a house and have kids, i may consider buying one just to have in my house, but i probably wont get any bullets, just use the gun as a scare tool.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

JD7.62 said:


> Takes so much more commitment and raw hatred to beat someone to death with a club.
> Gun is just: flex one finger and anothers life is erased.
> People will never stop killing each other, but when its easy to do, im going to bet it happens more often.
> 
> ...


Last time I checked achohol, tobacco and vehicles werent protected in our Bill of Rights.









I love how R1 pretends to be a 2nd Amendment supportor and real gun owner...







News flash R1, dont think Barry isnt going to grab guns, look at Shitcago.
[/quote]

huh? way to make an argument...? what exactly are you trying to say? just spit it out man. what's your reasoning for that statement?


----------



## greenmonkey51 (Aug 16, 2004)

Legal guns are not the problem. You think some gangbanger in LA rolled on down to the local gun shop and bought his tech nine or ak. If I'm gonna kill someone you think that waiting an extra couple days or only allowing me to buy one gun is going to matter. Put all the money you allot for gun control and shift it to stopping drunk drivers and you'll be better off.


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

Nick G said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You can use the exact same reasoning for people into fighting sports. Hell, I'll even go as far to say that you guys are 100x's worse. It's far more common to see a professional MMA fighter get in a fight in public than to see a competitive shooter shoot someone in public. In fact I don't think it ever happens. So if you want to stereotype people that ccw, you have no room to talk because martial artist/mma guys have a far worse stereotype.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

Scrappy said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..:laugh: A wise man once said "Talk about death enough, death is gonna come", well walk around all day toying with the idea of one day having to kill somebody and sooner or later you'll bring trouble upon yourself. Gaurendamtee 90% of the wanna be's on here don't have what it takes anyway. I can't for a second fathom the idea of living a life constantly toying with a prelude to a situation that would leave you worse off regardless of the outcome. For entertainment?:laugh: retards need to find another hobby, lifes to short to walk around entertaining yourself with feeling threatened.
> 
> Sort of like the wanna be tough guys I'd see come into the gym all the time, never actually interested in the sport, don't want to listen to sh*t because they're know it all tough guys. They'd put a woopin on a punching bag, look good doing it, get cocky and think their hot sh*t. Put em in the ring with an actual fighter and all those delusions went right back into their asshole. Show me a person that actually looks foward to being a killer and I'll show you the biggest p*ssy of them all.. You want to be a killer? Real killers don't hesitate when threatened or not, chances are you will. And if you do get lucky you're still fucked. Why not live a humble life, enjoy the ones you love and surround yourselves with good people. Then maybe you won't have to walk around all day worrying about what you would do if some "bad guy" decided to bend you over :laugh: f*cking idiots. Hey look boys I got camo on while walking through walmart, the f*cking clerk can't see me so I'm a bonified killer
> 
> ...


You can use the exact same reasoning for people into fighting sports. Hell, I'll even go as far to say that you guys are 100x's worse. It's far more common to see a professional MMA fighter get in a fight in public than to see a competitive shooter shoot someone in public. In fact I don't think it ever happens. So if you want to stereotype people that ccw, you have no room to talk because martial artist/mma guys have a far worse stereotype.
[/quote]

yeah, but that's not the issue...what percentage of guns sold at a gun show are used in crime? now THAT would be a very interesting statistic to see...probably would put to rest a lot of argument on both sides.


----------



## FuZZy (Apr 18, 2003)

Gun control only hurts, us, the reasonable productive citizen who will only use our guns justifiably. No matter what, a criminal can and will get a gun, and where does that leave me. Utterly defenseless. Virginia Tech, perfect case and point. Gun Free Zone. If I was a criminal, I'd be targeting a gun free zone. I won't have to worry about an armed citizen, who is usually below the radar, only a man in Blue who sticks out.


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

Nick G said:


> *Gun control is extensive background checks, smart gun technology once its reasonable, waiting periods for guns, one gun a month per person, shut down some of the loopholes that are out there that allow people to get legal guns easier. Also stricter penalties for those selling guns illegally. *
> 
> i dunno, i never researched what is possible, to be honest, i never really think about guns, except nerf guns, speaking of which, im getting that new one that is belt fed, shoots two darts per second, battery powered either tonight or tomorrow night, whichever i get out shopping.
> 
> I figure if someone is going to shoot me, then me having a gun wont help much. Once i buy a house and have kids, i may consider buying one just to have in my house, but i probably wont get any bullets, just use the gun as a scare tool.


you just listed the exact process for purchasing a handgun in california. handgun certification, background check, 30-day waiting period and 1 per month.


----------



## DiPpY eGgS (Mar 6, 2005)

why not ban guns..

I mean we the people have already left our micro managed government 
in charge of everything in our lives. It's pathetic. Why not let them bathe us, and change our dirty diapers?

There are no perfect coutries, or people. Accidents happen, people do bad things from time to time.. You will never get around that.

But to let a government get away with tanking billions and billions of it's people's tax dollars on pet projects, 'social experiments', corruption, and corporate bailouts, is what is insane.

How come everyone trusts our government with so much, when they have proved that they can't do anything right? -(and rip us off to boot)
This is the essence of the 2nd amendment.

On a side note, I'm hoping I won't have to tolerate 4 more years of 'politicial correctness' again... pleeze.
Tell me it's over!!


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

i mean, the government has expanded so far beyond what it was intended to be originally, that the argument of "to stop a tyrannical government" is absolutely rediculous.

also, you're not a criminal until you do something against the law. so a law abiding citizen can go out and purchase a gun, then someone will piss them off on the wrong day, and since the temptation is there to exact their power, they become a criminal. and then it's, "oh he wasn't a law abiding citizen, he was a criminal". the fact is, gun bans dont work at all, the focus needs to be on cheap, easy to obtain, small pistols. of the top 10 guns used in crime, 9 are pistols. all of them are cheap as hell. so now, why are we banning hugely expensive weapons, especially ones that have NEVER been used in a crime, but not going after these small pistols?


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Ex0dus said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..:laugh: A wise man once said "Talk about death enough, death is gonna come", well walk around all day toying with the idea of one day having to kill somebody and sooner or later you'll bring trouble upon yourself. Gaurendamtee 90% of the wanna be's on here don't have what it takes anyway. I can't for a second fathom the idea of living a life constantly toying with a prelude to a situation that would leave you worse off regardless of the outcome. For entertainment?:laugh: retards need to find another hobby, lifes to short to walk around entertaining yourself with feeling threatened.
> 
> Sort of like the wanna be tough guys I'd see come into the gym all the time, never actually interested in the sport, don't want to listen to sh*t because they're know it all tough guys. They'd put a woopin on a punching bag, look good doing it, get cocky and think their hot sh*t. Put em in the ring with an actual fighter and all those delusions went right back into their asshole. Show me a person that actually looks foward to being a killer and I'll show you the biggest p*ssy of them all.. You want to be a killer? Real killers don't hesitate when threatened or not, chances are you will. And if you do get lucky you're still fucked. Why not live a humble life, enjoy the ones you love and surround yourselves with good people. Then maybe you won't have to walk around all day worrying about what you would do if some "bad guy" decided to bend you over :laugh: f*cking idiots. Hey look boys I got camo on while walking through walmart, the f*cking clerk can't see me so I'm a bonified killer
> 
> ...


*Who said anything about wanting to kill any one in this thread....

You truly are a moron to the worst degree. You make ASSumptions based on sh*t you read in some liberal rag. *

You must be one of them true tough guys you speak of, huh?
[/quote]

Yeah because its not like your simple ass hasn't been preaching "second amendment, we have the right to protect ourselves"








I through in the typical "donut hole" about walking through walmart with camo on just to let you know how predictable you actually are..

..tough guy? well I sure as hell never claimed I needed a weapon to protect myself in my own country besides wheres the fun in just shooting somebody







.. I don't carry outside of on my way to target and theres a reason for it, I'm more afraid of myself then some retard with a .45 and his "second amendment". Prime example, had a difference one night at the bar with a new guy who was an off duty CO, we both were carrying but he decided to get up and flash his side piece and put his hand on it after I told him about himself. Now my first instinct at that point was to just put one in between his eyes knowing I was in my legal right and there were plenty of witnesses. But then figured this guy must think he's Clint Eastwood and not considering that I was also carrying at the time. Long story short, I gave him all the time in the world to put his pistol to use instead of playing show and tell.:laugh: But typically and predictably he fell short of his delusions so I did him a favor and broke his arm at his wrist and his elbow and gave him a few stitches. Much more satisfying btw then just putting him out of his misery.. Cops came and the dumb ass ended up losing his job and his license.


----------



## JD7.62 (Apr 7, 2005)

Liquid said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..:laugh: A wise man once said "Talk about death enough, death is gonna come", well walk around all day toying with the idea of one day having to kill somebody and sooner or later you'll bring trouble upon yourself. Gaurendamtee 90% of the wanna be's on here don't have what it takes anyway. I can't for a second fathom the idea of living a life constantly toying with a prelude to a situation that would leave you worse off regardless of the outcome. For entertainment?:laugh: retards need to find another hobby, lifes to short to walk around entertaining yourself with feeling threatened.
> 
> Sort of like the wanna be tough guys I'd see come into the gym all the time, never actually interested in the sport, don't want to listen to sh*t because they're know it all tough guys. They'd put a woopin on a punching bag, look good doing it, get cocky and think their hot sh*t. Put em in the ring with an actual fighter and all those delusions went right back into their asshole. Show me a person that actually looks foward to being a killer and I'll show you the biggest p*ssy of them all.. You want to be a killer? Real killers don't hesitate when threatened or not, chances are you will. And if you do get lucky you're still fucked. Why not live a humble life, enjoy the ones you love and surround yourselves with good people. Then maybe you won't have to walk around all day worrying about what you would do if some "bad guy" decided to bend you over :laugh: f*cking idiots. Hey look boys I got camo on while walking through walmart, the f*cking clerk can't see me so I'm a bonified killer
> 
> ...


*Who said anything about wanting to kill any one in this thread....

You truly are a moron to the worst degree. You make ASSumptions based on sh*t you read in some liberal rag. *

You must be one of them true tough guys you speak of, huh?
[/quote]

Yeah because its not like your simple ass hasn't been preaching "second amendment, we have the right to protect ourselves"








I through in the typical "donut hole" about walking through walmart with camo on just to let you know how predictable you actually are..

..tough guy? well I sure as hell never claimed I needed a weapon to protect myself in my own country besides wheres the fun in just shooting somebody :laugh: .. I don't carry outside of on my way to target and theres a reason for it, I'm more afraid of myself then some retard with a .45 and his "second amendment". Prime example, had a difference one night at the bar with a new guy who was an off duty CO, we both were carrying but he decided to get up and flash his side piece and put his hand on it after I told him about himself. Now my first instinct at that point was to just put one in between his eyes knowing I was in my legal right and there were plenty of witnesses. But then figured this guy must think he's Clint Eastwood and not considering that I was also carrying at the time. Long story short, I gave him all the time in the world to put his pistol to use instead of playing show and tell.:laugh: But typically and predictably he fell short of his delusions so I did him a favor and broke his arm at his wrist and his elbow and gave him a few stitches. Much more satisfying btw then just putting him out of his misery.. Cops came and the dumb ass ended up losing his job and his license.
[/quote]

I could have misread because you do write like an eight your old, but are you admitting to ILLEGALLY carrying your weapon to a bar?

You are lucky that fool ( he really was a fool for flashing his weapon) didnt know how to draw down or youd be a dead man. If I had my weapon and never planned on using but some tool bag like you decides to break my arm, well he aint getting that close.


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

Liquid said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..:laugh: A wise man once said "Talk about death enough, death is gonna come", well walk around all day toying with the idea of one day having to kill somebody and sooner or later you'll bring trouble upon yourself. Gaurendamtee 90% of the wanna be's on here don't have what it takes anyway. I can't for a second fathom the idea of living a life constantly toying with a prelude to a situation that would leave you worse off regardless of the outcome. For entertainment?:laugh: retards need to find another hobby, lifes to short to walk around entertaining yourself with feeling threatened.
> 
> Sort of like the wanna be tough guys I'd see come into the gym all the time, never actually interested in the sport, don't want to listen to sh*t because they're know it all tough guys. They'd put a woopin on a punching bag, look good doing it, get cocky and think their hot sh*t. Put em in the ring with an actual fighter and all those delusions went right back into their asshole. Show me a person that actually looks foward to being a killer and I'll show you the biggest p*ssy of them all.. You want to be a killer? Real killers don't hesitate when threatened or not, chances are you will. And if you do get lucky you're still fucked. Why not live a humble life, enjoy the ones you love and surround yourselves with good people. Then maybe you won't have to walk around all day worrying about what you would do if some "bad guy" decided to bend you over :laugh: f*cking idiots. Hey look boys I got camo on while walking through walmart, the f*cking clerk can't see me so I'm a bonified killer
> 
> ...


*Who said anything about wanting to kill any one in this thread....

You truly are a moron to the worst degree. You make ASSumptions based on sh*t you read in some liberal rag. *

You must be one of them true tough guys you speak of, huh?
[/quote]

Yeah because its not like your simple ass hasn't been preaching "second amendment, we have the right to protect ourselves"








I through in the typical "donut hole" about walking through walmart with camo on just to let you know how predictable you actually are..

..tough guy? well I sure as hell never claimed I needed a weapon to protect myself in my own country besides wheres the fun in just shooting somebody :laugh: .. I don't carry outside of on my way to target and theres a reason for it, I'm more afraid of myself then some retard with a .45 and his "second amendment". Prime example, had a difference one night at the bar with a new guy who was an off duty CO, we both were carrying but he decided to get up and flash his side piece and put his hand on it after I told him about himself. Now my first instinct at that point was to just put one in between his eyes knowing I was in my legal right and there were plenty of witnesses. But then figured this guy must think he's Clint Eastwood and not considering that I was also carrying at the time. Long story short, I gave him all the time in the world to put his pistol to use instead of playing show and tell.:laugh: But typically and predictably he fell short of his delusions so I did him a favor and broke his arm at his wrist and his elbow and gave him a few stitches. Much more satisfying btw then just putting him out of his misery.. Cops came and the dumb ass ended up losing his job and his license.
[/quote]

Not a single responsible ccw'er will carry while in a bar (guns and booze dont mix well) You sir are 1. full of sh*t or 2. the biggest moron alive. 
I tend to think 1 and 2.

You claim you dont need a gun to protect yourself but then you go on to tell some story about you carrying a guy.... Figure that one out.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

Nick G said:


> ...just use the gun as a scare tool.


That is a very bad idea. What if you point your _empty_ gun at the guy, and instead of getting scared and running, he pulls out his own _loaded_ gun and pops you? You never escalate a situation like that unless you're prepared to go all the way. Either get on your knees, beg for your life, and hope the scumbag is in a giving mood, or throw down and blow the f*cker out of his shoes. Your choice.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

Piranha Dan said:


> ...just use the gun as a scare tool.


That is a very bad idea. What if you point your _empty_ gun at the guy, and instead of getting scared and running, he pulls out his own _loaded_ gun and pops you? You never escalate a situation like that unless you're prepared to go all the way. Either get on your knees, beg for your life, and hope the scumbag is in a giving mood, or throw down and blow the f*cker out of his shoes. Your choice.
[/quote]

where'd the guy with the trunk get all his guns?


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

r1dermon said:


> i mean, the government has expanded so far beyond what it was intended to be originally, that the argument of "to stop a tyrannical government" is absolutely rediculous.
> 
> also, you're not a criminal until you do something against the law. so a law abiding citizen can go out and purchase a gun, then someone will piss them off on the wrong day, and since the temptation is there to exact their power, they become a criminal. and then it's, "oh he wasn't a law abiding citizen, he was a criminal". the fact is, gun bans dont work at all, the focus needs to be on cheap, easy to obtain, small pistols. of the top 10 guns used in crime, 9 are pistols. all of them are cheap as hell. so now, why are we banning hugely expensive weapons, especially ones that have NEVER been used in a crime, but not going after these small pistols?


They tried that in Cali. So all the gang bangers stopped buying little cheap ass .22's and .38's. They started carrying .45's, 9mm, etc... The number of shootings stayed about the same but the fatality rate from those shooting rose sharply.


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

JD7.62 said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..:laugh: A wise man once said "Talk about death enough, death is gonna come", well walk around all day toying with the idea of one day having to kill somebody and sooner or later you'll bring trouble upon yourself. Gaurendamtee 90% of the wanna be's on here don't have what it takes anyway. I can't for a second fathom the idea of living a life constantly toying with a prelude to a situation that would leave you worse off regardless of the outcome. For entertainment?:laugh: retards need to find another hobby, lifes to short to walk around entertaining yourself with feeling threatened.
> 
> Sort of like the wanna be tough guys I'd see come into the gym all the time, never actually interested in the sport, don't want to listen to sh*t because they're know it all tough guys. They'd put a woopin on a punching bag, look good doing it, get cocky and think their hot sh*t. Put em in the ring with an actual fighter and all those delusions went right back into their asshole. Show me a person that actually looks foward to being a killer and I'll show you the biggest p*ssy of them all.. You want to be a killer? Real killers don't hesitate when threatened or not, chances are you will. And if you do get lucky you're still fucked. Why not live a humble life, enjoy the ones you love and surround yourselves with good people. Then maybe you won't have to walk around all day worrying about what you would do if some "bad guy" decided to bend you over :laugh: f*cking idiots. Hey look boys I got camo on while walking through walmart, the f*cking clerk can't see me so I'm a bonified killer
> 
> ...


*Who said anything about wanting to kill any one in this thread....

You truly are a moron to the worst degree. You make ASSumptions based on sh*t you read in some liberal rag. *

You must be one of them true tough guys you speak of, huh?
[/quote]

Yeah because its not like your simple ass hasn't been preaching "second amendment, we have the right to protect ourselves"








I through in the typical "donut hole" about walking through walmart with camo on just to let you know how predictable you actually are..

..tough guy? well I sure as hell never claimed I needed a weapon to protect myself in my own country besides wheres the fun in just shooting somebody :laugh: .. I don't carry outside of on my way to target and theres a reason for it, I'm more afraid of myself then some retard with a .45 and his "second amendment". Prime example, had a difference one night at the bar with a new guy who was an off duty CO, we both were carrying but he decided to get up and flash his side piece and put his hand on it after I told him about himself. Now my first instinct at that point was to just put one in between his eyes knowing I was in my legal right and there were plenty of witnesses. But then figured this guy must think he's Clint Eastwood and not considering that I was also carrying at the time. Long story short, I gave him all the time in the world to put his pistol to use instead of playing show and tell.:laugh: But typically and predictably he fell short of his delusions so I did him a favor and broke his arm at his wrist and his elbow and gave him a few stitches. Much more satisfying btw then just putting him out of his misery.. Cops came and the dumb ass ended up losing his job and his license.
[/quote]

I could have misread because you do write like an eight your old, but are you admitting to ILLEGALLY carrying your weapon to a bar?

You are lucky that fool ( he really was a fool for flashing his weapon) didnt know how to draw down or youd be a dead man. If I had my weapon and never planned on using but some tool bag like you decides to break my arm, well he aint getting that close.
[/quote]

Draw down eh? You act like he purposely took an ass wooping







. kid, one look at you and I'd know exactly what to do with you and 
it probably wouldn't be the first time for you either since you'd like to relate to the idiot. Or you'd have enough sense and we wouldn't have a problem in the first place. A beautiful thing options are, everyone has more then one. Nobody forced him to get drunk and disrespect my friends wife then disrespect my buddy when he asked him what his problem was. And its funny how everyone in the bar seen things the way I did when giving the cops a report or he wouldn't have lost his job or his right to carry and wouldn't have been banned from the bar like it mattered after all that :laugh:. All I got was banned for a week for knocking out the owner by accident, which wasn't included in the report because it was an *accident*. I don't look for trouble but if you are, I really don't care who you think you are, I'm always happy to oblige.

Bottom line, put a *"retard"* with a wanna be cop badge and his second amendment in the same bar as me, feed him a little beer and it'll happen everytime. And you're most likely the same exact retard in dire need of a lesson if you feel using a weapon and killing someone is better then a simple scrap. With that statement alone your pussonification has just tripled tsk tsk and thats how accidents happen







.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

Scrappy said:


> i mean, the government has expanded so far beyond what it was intended to be originally, that the argument of "to stop a tyrannical government" is absolutely rediculous.
> 
> also, you're not a criminal until you do something against the law. so a law abiding citizen can go out and purchase a gun, then someone will piss them off on the wrong day, and since the temptation is there to exact their power, they become a criminal. and then it's, "oh he wasn't a law abiding citizen, he was a criminal". the fact is, gun bans dont work at all, the focus needs to be on cheap, easy to obtain, small pistols. of the top 10 guns used in crime, 9 are pistols. all of them are cheap as hell. so now, why are we banning hugely expensive weapons, especially ones that have NEVER been used in a crime, but not going after these small pistols?


They tried that in Cali. So all the gang bangers stopped buying little cheap ass .22's and .38's. They started carrying .45's, 9mm, etc... The number of shootings stayed about the same but the fatality rate from those shooting rose sharply.
[/quote]

do you have any stats or info on that initiative and the outcome?


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Ex0dus said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..:laugh: A wise man once said "Talk about death enough, death is gonna come", well walk around all day toying with the idea of one day having to kill somebody and sooner or later you'll bring trouble upon yourself. Gaurendamtee 90% of the wanna be's on here don't have what it takes anyway. I can't for a second fathom the idea of living a life constantly toying with a prelude to a situation that would leave you worse off regardless of the outcome. For entertainment?:laugh: retards need to find another hobby, lifes to short to walk around entertaining yourself with feeling threatened.
> 
> Sort of like the wanna be tough guys I'd see come into the gym all the time, never actually interested in the sport, don't want to listen to sh*t because they're know it all tough guys. They'd put a woopin on a punching bag, look good doing it, get cocky and think their hot sh*t. Put em in the ring with an actual fighter and all those delusions went right back into their asshole. Show me a person that actually looks foward to being a killer and I'll show you the biggest p*ssy of them all.. You want to be a killer? Real killers don't hesitate when threatened or not, chances are you will. And if you do get lucky you're still fucked. Why not live a humble life, enjoy the ones you love and surround yourselves with good people. Then maybe you won't have to walk around all day worrying about what you would do if some "bad guy" decided to bend you over :laugh: f*cking idiots. Hey look boys I got camo on while walking through walmart, the f*cking clerk can't see me so I'm a bonified killer
> 
> ...


*Who said anything about wanting to kill any one in this thread....

You truly are a moron to the worst degree. You make ASSumptions based on sh*t you read in some liberal rag. *

You must be one of them true tough guys you speak of, huh?
[/quote]

Yeah because its not like your simple ass hasn't been preaching "second amendment, we have the right to protect ourselves"








I through in the typical "donut hole" about walking through walmart with camo on just to let you know how predictable you actually are..

..tough guy? well I sure as hell never claimed I needed a weapon to protect myself in my own country besides wheres the fun in just shooting somebody :laugh: .. I don't carry outside of on my way to target and theres a reason for it, I'm more afraid of myself then some retard with a .45 and his "second amendment". Prime example, had a difference one night at the bar with a new guy who was an off duty CO, we both were carrying but he decided to get up and flash his side piece and put his hand on it after I told him about himself. Now my first instinct at that point was to just put one in between his eyes knowing I was in my legal right and there were plenty of witnesses. But then figured this guy must think he's Clint Eastwood and not considering that I was also carrying at the time. Long story short, I gave him all the time in the world to put his pistol to use instead of playing show and tell.:laugh: But typically and predictably he fell short of his delusions so I did him a favor and broke his arm at his wrist and his elbow and gave him a few stitches. Much more satisfying btw then just putting him out of his misery.. Cops came and the dumb ass ended up losing his job and his license.
[/quote]

Not a single responsible ccw'er will carry while in a bar (guns and booze dont mix well) You sir are 1. full of sh*t or 2. the biggest moron alive. 
I tend to think 1 and 2.

You claim you dont need a gun to protect yourself but then you go on to tell some story about you carrying a guy.... Figure that one out.
[/quote]

One too many occasions where certified idiots/pussies would flash their side piece in the middle of an altercation. Whether it'd be the off duty armored truck driver that flashed his piece over a bit of road rage or the CO who's read one too many Guns&Ammo magazines that thinks its perfectly ok to hit on a guys wife while he's sitting right there because he's jail security with a wanna be badge and a gun







. Yeah I stopped carrying for the sake of the few that are out there.


----------



## beercandan (Nov 3, 2004)

Liquid said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..:laugh: A wise man once said "Talk about death enough, death is gonna come", well walk around all day toying with the idea of one day having to kill somebody and sooner or later you'll bring trouble upon yourself. Gaurendamtee 90% of the wanna be's on here don't have what it takes anyway. I can't for a second fathom the idea of living a life constantly toying with a prelude to a situation that would leave you worse off regardless of the outcome. For entertainment?:laugh: retards need to find another hobby, lifes to short to walk around entertaining yourself with feeling threatened.
> 
> Sort of like the wanna be tough guys I'd see come into the gym all the time, never actually interested in the sport, don't want to listen to sh*t because they're know it all tough guys. They'd put a woopin on a punching bag, look good doing it, get cocky and think their hot sh*t. Put em in the ring with an actual fighter and all those delusions went right back into their asshole. Show me a person that actually looks foward to being a killer and I'll show you the biggest p*ssy of them all.. You want to be a killer? Real killers don't hesitate when threatened or not, chances are you will. And if you do get lucky you're still fucked. Why not live a humble life, enjoy the ones you love and surround yourselves with good people. Then maybe you won't have to walk around all day worrying about what you would do if some "bad guy" decided to bend you over :laugh: f*cking idiots. Hey look boys I got camo on while walking through walmart, the f*cking clerk can't see me so I'm a bonified killer
> 
> ...


*Who said anything about wanting to kill any one in this thread....

You truly are a moron to the worst degree. You make ASSumptions based on sh*t you read in some liberal rag. *

You must be one of them true tough guys you speak of, huh?
[/quote]

Yeah because its not like your simple ass hasn't been preaching "second amendment, we have the right to protect ourselves"








I through in the typical "donut hole" about walking through walmart with camo on just to let you know how predictable you actually are..

..tough guy? well I sure as hell never claimed I needed a weapon to protect myself in my own country besides wheres the fun in just shooting somebody :laugh: .. I don't carry outside of on my way to target and theres a reason for it, I'm more afraid of myself then some retard with a .45 and his "second amendment". Prime example, had a difference one night at the bar with a new guy who was an off duty CO, we both were carrying but he decided to get up and flash his side piece and put his hand on it after I told him about himself. Now my first instinct at that point was to just put one in between his eyes knowing I was in my legal right and there were plenty of witnesses. But then figured this guy must think he's Clint Eastwood and not considering that I was also carrying at the time. Long story short, I gave him all the time in the world to put his pistol to use instead of playing show and tell.:laugh: But typically and predictably he fell short of his delusions so I did him a favor and broke his arm at his wrist and his elbow and gave him a few stitches. Much more satisfying btw then just putting him out of his misery.. Cops came and the dumb ass ended up losing his job and his license.
[/quote]
my friend got into a fight with an of duty police officer and ended up doing time and has a felony on his record....cant believe you got so lucky


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

beercandan said:


> yeah but the core of these "bad people" walk around toying with the very same idea half the pussies in this thread like to toy around with day in day out..:laugh: A wise man once said "Talk about death enough, death is gonna come", well walk around all day toying with the idea of one day having to kill somebody and sooner or later you'll bring trouble upon yourself. Gaurendamtee 90% of the wanna be's on here don't have what it takes anyway. I can't for a second fathom the idea of living a life constantly toying with a prelude to a situation that would leave you worse off regardless of the outcome. For entertainment?:laugh: retards need to find another hobby, lifes to short to walk around entertaining yourself with feeling threatened.
> 
> Sort of like the wanna be tough guys I'd see come into the gym all the time, never actually interested in the sport, don't want to listen to sh*t because they're know it all tough guys. They'd put a woopin on a punching bag, look good doing it, get cocky and think their hot sh*t. Put em in the ring with an actual fighter and all those delusions went right back into their asshole. Show me a person that actually looks foward to being a killer and I'll show you the biggest p*ssy of them all.. You want to be a killer? Real killers don't hesitate when threatened or not, chances are you will. And if you do get lucky you're still fucked. Why not live a humble life, enjoy the ones you love and surround yourselves with good people. Then maybe you won't have to walk around all day worrying about what you would do if some "bad guy" decided to bend you over :laugh: f*cking idiots. Hey look boys I got camo on while walking through walmart, the f*cking clerk can't see me so I'm a bonified killer
> 
> ...


*Who said anything about wanting to kill any one in this thread....

You truly are a moron to the worst degree. You make ASSumptions based on sh*t you read in some liberal rag. *

You must be one of them true tough guys you speak of, huh?
[/quote]

Yeah because its not like your simple ass hasn't been preaching "second amendment, we have the right to protect ourselves"








I through in the typical "donut hole" about walking through walmart with camo on just to let you know how predictable you actually are..

..tough guy? well I sure as hell never claimed I needed a weapon to protect myself in my own country besides wheres the fun in just shooting somebody :laugh: .. I don't carry outside of on my way to target and theres a reason for it, I'm more afraid of myself then some retard with a .45 and his "second amendment". Prime example, had a difference one night at the bar with a new guy who was an off duty CO, we both were carrying but he decided to get up and flash his side piece and put his hand on it after I told him about himself. Now my first instinct at that point was to just put one in between his eyes knowing I was in my legal right and there were plenty of witnesses. But then figured this guy must think he's Clint Eastwood and not considering that I was also carrying at the time. Long story short, I gave him all the time in the world to put his pistol to use instead of playing show and tell.:laugh: But typically and predictably he fell short of his delusions so I did him a favor and broke his arm at his wrist and his elbow and gave him a few stitches. Much more satisfying btw then just putting him out of his misery.. Cops came and the dumb ass ended up losing his job and his license.
[/quote]
my friend got into a fight with an of duty police officer and ended up doing time and has a felony on his record....cant believe you got so lucky








[/quote]

Off duty Correctional Officer, big difference, these are the chumps (well most of them anyway) that don't have what it takes to be a cop, and with obvious good reasons :laugh: . Some get through and you usually end up reading about them or seeing them on the evening news :laugh:

Doesn't matter anyway as soon as he shown his piece without being threatened with one, he was in for a night of fun. He just didn't know it until it happened lol.


----------



## beercandan (Nov 3, 2004)

oh sorry didn't know that's what that meant


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

r1dermon said:


> i mean, the government has expanded so far beyond what it was intended to be originally, that the argument of "to stop a tyrannical government" is absolutely rediculous.
> 
> also, you're not a criminal until you do something against the law. so a law abiding citizen can go out and purchase a gun, then someone will piss them off on the wrong day, and since the temptation is there to exact their power, they become a criminal. and then it's, "oh he wasn't a law abiding citizen, he was a criminal". the fact is, gun bans dont work at all, the focus needs to be on cheap, easy to obtain, small pistols. of the top 10 guns used in crime, 9 are pistols. all of them are cheap as hell. so now, why are we banning hugely expensive weapons, especially ones that have NEVER been used in a crime, but not going after these small pistols?


They tried that in Cali. So all the gang bangers stopped buying little cheap ass .22's and .38's. They started carrying .45's, 9mm, etc... The number of shootings stayed about the same but the fatality rate from those shooting rose sharply.
[/quote]

do you have any stats or info on that initiative and the outcome?
[/quote]
No, I'm too lazy to look for it.


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

Liquid said:


> One too many occasions where certified idiots/pussies would flash their side piece in the middle of an altercation. Whether it'd be the off duty armored truck driver that flashed his piece over a bit of road rage or the CO who's read one too many Guns&Ammo magazines that thinks its perfectly ok to hit on a guys wife while he's sitting right there because he's jail security with a wanna be badge and a gun :laugh: . Yeah I stopped carrying for the sake of the few that are out there.


So you stopped carrying because of idiots with guns out there? Sounds like to me all the more reason for carrying...

People who flash guns for the hell of it are morons. Not really where your from, but I have yet to see someone flash a gun just because. And if I saw someone flash a gun, id have enough smart sense to get the hell out of there. Call it what you want, "pussification", whatever.... I call it being able to go home alive.


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Ex0dus said:


> One too many occasions where certified idiots/pussies would flash their side piece in the middle of an altercation. Whether it'd be the off duty armored truck driver that flashed his piece over a bit of road rage or the CO who's read one too many Guns&Ammo magazines that thinks its perfectly ok to hit on a guys wife while he's sitting right there because he's jail security with a wanna be badge and a gun :laugh: . Yeah I stopped carrying for the sake of the few that are out there.


So you stopped carrying because of idiots with guns out there? Sounds like to me all the more reason for carrying...

People who flash guns for the hell of it are morons. Not really where your from, but I have yet to see someone flash a gun just because. And if I saw someone flash a gun, id have enough smart sense to get the hell out of there. Call it what you want, "pussification", whatever.... I call it being able to go home alive.
[/quote]

:laugh: I got my golden gloves at the age of 16 joined the army at 17, by 18 I was getting my ass handed to me and vice versa by Green Berets in our own little mma bouts as an extra curricular activity down in Benning before all this "UFC bullshit went main stream", had 20 certified kills by the age of 20, at 23 I was training with your Patterson Jrs and your Shannon Briggs locally, also fucked around with Jeet kun do locally before your "MMA" went mainstream. I'm really not to concerned with what kind of training your average failed cop went through. I love to fight, I love people that love to fight. Whether an opponent in the ring or an ignorant dumb ass outside of the ring, drunk or not and just someone who hasn't been laid on his ass yet, as long as hes game, I'd much rather do it with my hands rather a weapon and I advise and expect the same consideration. I love the sport of fighting and would never give a beating to anyone who wasn't asking for it or wasn't posing a threat to anyone in my immediate facinity. Even those that asked for it, all they got to do is politely tell me they had enough and 9 times out of ten regardless of what was said I'll let up. Its a beautiful thing communication. Sadly most would rather assume :laugh: which is ok by me, its your f*cking second amendment right







:laugh: .

P.S forgot to mention I'll gladly take an ass beating as well and buy giver of said ass beating free rounds. Lol I am definately willing to take it like I give it if left with little options but not much surprises me









I remember a time when a little scrap wasn't a big deal, now everyone needs a gun. Probably why their are a lot more people and their kids going postal every time someone gets their feelings hurt. You got entirely too many retards living day to day by catchy phrases like the original poster posted with delusions of being invincible while walking around using their "second amendment" right as an excuse to abuse what it was originally intended for. You take these same wanna be bad ass ideals the original poster posted and compare them to the ideals of gang bangers and what you got is one gigantic brain f*ck, all in the same ass fist pump... Territory, property, race, eye for an eye, protecting your own.:laugh: From what? Your environment and personification is what you make it. If you allow yourself to be drawn in and live in constant fear then your part of the problem and chances are you don't even know it.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

r1dermon said:


> where'd the guy with the trunk get all his guns?


They were stolen or illegaly smuggled into the country. Which brings us right back to my original point that enacting laws that do nothing but harass people who aren't breaking the law is pointless. 3 day waiting periods and one gun a month laws aren't going to stop the guy who's breaking into your house to steal your sh*t, and they're not going to stop the guy who's smuggling automatic weapons into Florida from South America either. Those are the things that have to be taken care of in order to keep guns out of the wrong hands. Doing anything else is just going to punish people who haven't done anything wrong.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

Piranha Dan said:


> where'd the guy with the trunk get all his guns?


They were stolen or illegaly smuggled into the country. Which brings us right back to my original point that enacting laws that do nothing but harass people who aren't breaking the law is pointless. 3 day waiting periods and one gun a month laws aren't going to stop the guy who's breaking into your house to steal your sh*t, and they're not going to stop the guy who's smuggling automatic weapons into Florida from South America either. Those are the things that have to be taken care of in order to keep guns out of the wrong hands. Doing anything else is just going to punish people who haven't done anything wrong.
[/quote]

im not sure automatic weapons have ever been used in a crime...illegally modified ones have, but no original auto's that im aware of.

as far as stolen or illegally smuggled guns go, "stolen" guns can be reported stolen, green money has no record of transaction. tell someone hey man, here's some guns, i bought them, scratched off the serial numbers, and then reported them stolen, gimme 400 bucks a pop for em and they're yours.

do you doubt that this happens ALL the time? the number 1 gun used in crime is a domestically manufactured one.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

r1dermon said:


> do you doubt that this happens ALL the time? the number 1 gun used in crime is a domestically manufactured one.


Nope. Not at all. I bet it happens all the time. Now tell me how making me wait 3 days to buy a gun, only letting me buy one gun a month, and banning me from owning certain types of guns for the most idiotic reasons is going to stop that.
I'm not saying the system doesn't have room for improvement. I'm saying that the improvements need to be made where they'll make a difference. Why isn't the guy falsely reporting a crime and grinding the serial numbers off guns (also a crime) in jail?


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Piranha Dan said:


> do you doubt that this happens ALL the time? the number 1 gun used in crime is a domestically manufactured one.


Nope. Not at all. I bet it happens all the time. Now tell me how making me wait 3 days to buy a gun, only letting me buy one gun a month, and banning me from owning certain types of guns for the most idiotic reasons is going to stop that.
I'm not saying the system doesn't have room for improvement. I'm saying that the improvements need to be made where they'll make a difference. Why isn't the guy falsely reporting a crime and grinding the serial numbers off guns (also a crime) in jail?
[/quote]
stricter punishments for illegal traffic of firearms, stricter gun control (including bullets)
even if it doesnt abolish the sale of illegal guns, it will drive the price of them up. 
take the money spent fighting marijuana and prostitutes and put it there. 
(and while we are at it, take the money fighting harder drugs and put it into drug prevention and treatment, locking people up doesnt seem to work... seems a little more sensical to have a heroin clinic that is clean, functional and open to anyone than for the cops fighting heroin to have shiny new cuffs and uber-overtime hours)
anything that makes a dent, puts guns a little more out of reach. 
we can let people damage themselves, thats fine, but we should focus on peoples ability to easily kill someone else.


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

just thought i'd add this. in compton and i think watts, the sheriffs allow turn-ins of weapons, no questions asked. the person receives gift cards for groceries and clothes and such. this has been going on for quite some time and it's my understanding that gun related killings have dropped. some locations have even received hand grenades.


----------



## Uncle Jesse (Feb 18, 2007)

hyphen said:


> just thought i'd add this. in compton and i think watts, the sheriffs allow turn-ins of weapons, no questions asked. the person receives gift cards for groceries and clothes and such. this has been going on for quite some time and it's my understanding that gun related killings have dropped.
> 
> some locations have even received hand grenades.


That's good but I still like Mary Carey's porn for guns!


----------



## CichlidAddict (Jul 1, 2005)

hyphen said:


> just thought i'd add this. in compton and i think watts, the sheriffs allow turn-ins of weapons, no questions asked. the person receives gift cards for groceries and clothes and such. this has been going on for quite some time and it's my understanding that gun related killings have dropped.
> 
> some locations have even received hand grenades.


The intention may be good, but that seems like a horrible way to do it. 
What about guns used in crimes? If they turn them in the evidence is gone and the case will remain unsolved. 
Also, wouldn't this encourage gun theft?


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

CichlidAddict said:


> just thought i'd add this. in compton and i think watts, the sheriffs allow turn-ins of weapons, no questions asked. the person receives gift cards for groceries and clothes and such. this has been going on for quite some time and it's my understanding that gun related killings have dropped.
> 
> some locations have even received hand grenades.


The intention may be good, but that seems like a horrible way to do it. 
What about guns used in crimes? If they turn them in the evidence is gone and the case will remain unsolved. 
Also, wouldn't this encourage gun theft?
[/quote]
nah, it actually really works. The reason it works is because there is no fear of repercussions from tainted guns. I am sure the guns are all documented and everything, but as long as there is trust, people still go to these things.
I heard about one in philly, they took in a sh*t-ton of guns, and the people who turned the guns in had reasons like: "they found guns in their kids/spouces/parents rooms" "they didnt want them anymore, and didnt want to sell them on the street" and a variety of other legitimate reasons.


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

CichlidAddict said:


> just thought i'd add this. in compton and i think watts, the sheriffs allow turn-ins of weapons, no questions asked. the person receives gift cards for groceries and clothes and such. this has been going on for quite some time and it's my understanding that gun related killings have dropped.
> 
> some locations have even received hand grenades.


The intention may be good, but that seems like a horrible way to do it. 
What about guns used in crimes? If they turn them in the evidence is gone and the case will remain unsolved. 
Also, wouldn't this encourage gun theft?
[/quote]

Actually, they test the guns to see if they were used in any crimes first, and then the gun is destroyed, smelted, whatever. I think the main idea behind this is to stop potential gun related crimes.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

new ways of attaching serial numbers to guns should be looked into. laser etching microscopic identities into the guns...

also, i never asserted that gun bans work, in-fact, i believe i've disputed that argument in the past. i've also never endorsed waiting periods, nor have i expressed favor for gun limits, or any of those other restrictive measures that occur at the point of sale. the only one i do agree with is the instant background check. banning guns isn't going to do anything, because like you and many others have said, they will be imported illegally. in-fact, it was the arizona governor that said on the record that arizona gets upwards of 5,000 border hoppers a night...1 night. 5,000 people who probably dont have guns or drugs for the most part, but the ones that do, will have as many and as much as they can handle. as far as im concerned, the constitution IS the "supreme law of the land". unfortunately it's being assaulted at every angle. not just in the guns department. what about freedom of speech? now i can't say god because a few non-conformists dont agree with it? what about the right to privacy" i actually just heard on the radio about someone who was eavesdropped on by the FBI for absolutely no reason whatsoever. but they had the right because of the patriot act.

the fact is, this is equivalant to a national security issue, and thus, should be handled in a responsible, sensible manner by the federal government. this black market needs to be destroyed, we could tag guns with micro-chips or other microscopic instruments that records the guns identity, so if ever found, it could be traced to the original owner. measures like that have to occur IMO long before anyone considers an all out ban on guns, and moreso, a made up category of firearms, such as "assault weapons", which could be anything really.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

I have some ideas.
We should make every citizen in america pay $500 to install a breathalyzer on their car to prevent drunken driving. Yea, most people don't drink and drive, but some of them do. Making millions of law-abiding drivers pay $500 for the ignorance of a few thousand people makes sense, right?

Keeping Piranhas should be illegal too. Yea, there's millions of responsible people out there who properly care for them, but some people are't responsible and might dump them in a lake and damage the environment. Again, it totally makes sense to punish huge numbers of people who don't break the law because 1 or 2 do, correct?

The stuff above sounds crazy right? This is the kind of crap gun control advocates are trying to do to gun owners. According to them, I, an honest, law abiding citizen, should be subject to unfair taxation, invasion of privacy, and all kinds of ridiculous regulations (how about a 3 day waiting period on f*cking cars they kill 10x more people then guns do every year), all so that maybe, just maybe we'll see a slight drop in violent crime (there are no guarantees it will either).

The facts are the vast majority of gun owners do not commit crimes with their guns. We are decent, law abiding people who operate our firearms in a safe, responsible manner. It is not fair, in any sense, to punish an innocent majority for the crimes of a few.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Piranha Dan said:


> The facts are the vast majority of gun owners do not commit crimes with their guns. We are decent, law abiding people who operate our firearms in a safe, responsible manner. It is not fair, in any sense, to punish an innocent majority for the crimes of a few.


then why?: 


> Firearms are the second leading cause of traumatic death related to a consumer product in the United States and are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24. Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 2003 alone, 30,136 Americans died by gunfire: 16,907 in firearm suicides, 11,920 in firearm homicides, 730 in unintentional shootings, and 232 in firearm deaths of unknown intent, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries.


some interesting statistics about handguns for self defense:


> Self Defense
> 
> For every time a gun in the home is used in a self-defense homicide, a gun will be used in-
> 
> ...


and because i know the next question is "source?"
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/hgbanfs.htm

that site is anti-NRA (so some of you may just turn it off right away and say its biased), but all their facts are referenced.


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

Nick G said:


> The facts are the vast majority of gun owners do not commit crimes with their guns. We are decent, law abiding people who operate our firearms in a safe, responsible manner. It is not fair, in any sense, to punish an innocent majority for the crimes of a few.


then why?: 


> Firearms are the second leading cause of traumatic death related to a consumer product in the United States and are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24. Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 2003 alone, 30,136 Americans died by gunfire: 16,907 in firearm suicides, 11,920 in firearm homicides, 730 in unintentional shootings, and 232 in firearm deaths of unknown intent, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries.


some interesting statistics about handguns for self defense:


> Self Defense
> 
> For every time a gun in the home is used in a self-defense homicide, a gun will be used in-
> 
> ...


and because i know the next question is "source?"
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/hgbanfs.htm

that site is anti-NRA (so some of you may just turn it off right away and say its biased), but all their facts are referenced.
[/quote]

you're also citing stats from 11 years ago. gang banging was a lot bigger and resulted in a lot more gun related homicides in the 90s. sh*t, in '95 a group of asian gang bangers killed or attempted to kill about 24 people in a year in my area. you should cite some more recent sources. i'm sure you'll find that murder rates are significantly lower than it was in '97.


----------



## Uncle Jesse (Feb 18, 2007)

We don't need "gun control". As stated earlier the people committing these crime don't give twoshits about laws. So you can create all the laws you want IT WILL NOT AFFECT THEM! What we need is stricter punishment on violent crimes. There is only ONE reason for and individual to be carrying or even have a stolen gun........ to shoot someone. Why not charge people who are caught with these, with attempted murder? Why is it that someone can kill another human-being and not get the death penalty? Hell some of these guys do a few years then they're free?


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

other stats were from 2003 ... im sure that stats like this take a bit to compile and work through, who knows they are just stats, im just pointing out a trend


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

The trend you're trying to point out isn't valid if the author of that site gets to pick and choose stats from 1997-2003.

Edit
----------------

You know what, I take that back. The author is picking and choosing from the fbi stats from as early as 1978. Damn, that's the year I was born.


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

febsalien said:


> We don't need "gun control". As stated earlier the people committing these crime don't give twoshits about laws. So you can create all the laws you want IT WILL NOT AFFECT THEM! What we need is stricter punishment on violent crimes. There is only ONE reason for and individual to be carrying or even have a stolen gun........ to shoot someone. Why not charge people who are caught with these, with attempted murder? Why is it that someone can kill another human-being and not get the death penalty? Hell some of these guys do a few years then they're free?


because that's a violation of civil rights. if they didn't try to kill someone then you can't say they that did. i may want to steal that bar of candy but you can't cuff me for eyeballing it. there are already strict punishments in cali. a buddy of mine was packing a 9mm in his belt that was unloaded (no magazine) with nothing in the chamber (we were in jr. high and thought we were cool). he got caught with it and did an immediate 6mo stint at juvenile hall.

another close friend of mine that i've known since elementary shot some dude on the freeway when he turned to gang banging in high school, he didn't kill him though. he's now serving 25 years with eligibility for parole in 20. pretty strict, i'd say.

you have to understand that the people wanting these gun bans are people that don't know how criminals think or how sh*t works. they don't know that a gun ban won't affect criminals because they get their guns illegally anyway. they just want to have some sort of reassurance that there will be less of them on the street. "joe the plumber" and your average soccer mom in the suburbs don't know sh*t, they just don't want guns around and politicians feed them what they want.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

happy birthday scrappy btw

some interesting links:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/weapons.htm

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/circumst.htm#circumgun

http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/ucr.htm

i can research some more later.... i think i will, kinda interesting.


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

Nick G said:


> happy birthday scrappy btw


Thanks!


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

hyphen said:


> We don't need "gun control". As stated earlier the people committing these crime don't give twoshits about laws. So you can create all the laws you want IT WILL NOT AFFECT THEM! What we need is stricter punishment on violent crimes. There is only ONE reason for and individual to be carrying or even have a stolen gun........ to shoot someone. Why not charge people who are caught with these, with attempted murder? Why is it that someone can kill another human-being and not get the death penalty? Hell some of these guys do a few years then they're free?


because that's a violation of civil rights. if they didn't try to kill someone then you can't say they that did. i may want to steal that bar of candy but you can't cuff me for eyeballing it. there are already strict punishments in cali. a buddy of mine was packing a 9mm in his belt that was unloaded (no magazine) with nothing in the chamber (we were in jr. high and thought we were cool). he got caught with it and did an immediate 6mo stint at juvenile hall.

another close friend of mine that i've known since elementary shot some dude on the freeway when he turned to gang banging in high school, he didn't kill him though. he's now serving 25 years with eligibility for parole in 20. pretty strict, i'd say.

you have to understand that the people wanting these gun bans are people that don't know how criminals think or how sh*t works. they don't know that a gun ban won't affect criminals because they get their guns illegally anyway. they just want to have some sort of reassurance that there will be less of them on the street. "joe the plumber" and your average soccer mom in the suburbs don't know sh*t, they just don't want guns around and politicians feed them what they want.
[/quote]

just so there is no confusion, i dont think guns should be banned. 
just to set that record straight.


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

here's some more food for thought:



"http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081001184106.htm said:


> ScienceDaily (Oct. 6, 2008) - A new study finds no evidence that gun shows lead to substantial increases in either gun-related homicides or suicides.
> 
> The University of Michigan and University of Maryland study also shows that tighter regulation of gun shows does not appear to reduce the number of firearms-related deaths.
> 
> ...


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

Piranha Dan said:


> I have some ideas.
> We should make every citizen in america pay $500 to install a breathalyzer on their car to prevent drunken driving. Yea, most people don't drink and drive, but some of them do. Making millions of law-abiding drivers pay $500 for the ignorance of a few thousand people makes sense, right?
> 
> Keeping Piranhas should be illegal too. Yea, there's millions of responsible people out there who properly care for them, but some people are't responsible and might dump them in a lake and damage the environment. Again, it totally makes sense to punish huge numbers of people who don't break the law because 1 or 2 do, correct?
> ...


hey man, someone can drink and drive as easy as they can drink and shoot, want to install breathalizers on your guns?

the fact is, the few ruin it for the many, it's always been the case. everyone is worried about a terrorist, 1 terrorist, a single terrorist person, 1 guy. so now we enact laws that put suspicion on EVERYBODY IN THE US just because of a guy with a beard. why? how much damage can 1 guy do? september 11th is a gauge for that type of question.

dont think for a second that some asshole out in the burbs who has no history of violence or anything like that isn't going to jump at the chance to make a quick buck by buying and pawning off weapons out of his trunk. he reports them as stolen and gets off scott free, maybe none of the guns he sells to inner city gang bangers are used in any homicides, but maybe 1 is, now what? how do we stop it? 1 gangbanger goes to jail, but rest assured, that asshole who supplied the guns is out buying more to pawn off...never going to get caught because he's an NRA member, a "law abiding citizen", a gun enthusiast. suspicion is low, and he'll never get caught because there's nothing built into the system that will lead back to him. that's something that needs to be fixed IMO. i believe solidly that that is the problem with the gun crime that goes on...

btw that study is bogus, look at the demographics, how does texas's gang activity compare with southern californias? especially MS-13. the only way to conduct a study like that is to get figures on actual firearms used in homicides and what percentage of them were purchased at gun shows. who sponsored that study, the NRA?


----------



## Uncle Jesse (Feb 18, 2007)

hyphen said:


> We don't need "gun control". As stated earlier the people committing these crime don't give twoshits about laws. So you can create all the laws you want IT WILL NOT AFFECT THEM! What we need is stricter punishment on violent crimes. There is only ONE reason for and individual to be carrying or even have a stolen gun........ to shoot someone. Why not charge people who are caught with these, with attempted murder? Why is it that someone can kill another human-being and not get the death penalty? Hell some of these guys do a few years then they're free?


because that's a violation of civil rights. if they didn't try to kill someone then you can't say they that did. i may want to steal that bar of candy but you can't cuff me for eyeballing it. there are already strict punishments in cali. a buddy of mine was packing a 9mm in his belt that was unloaded (no magazine) with nothing in the chamber (we were in jr. high and thought we were cool). he got caught with it and did an immediate 6mo stint at juvenile hall.

*another close friend of mine that i've known since elementary shot some dude on the freeway when he turned to gang banging in high school, he didn't kill him though. he's now serving 25 years with eligibility for parole in 20. pretty strict, i'd say.*

you have to understand that the people wanting these gun bans are people that don't know how criminals think or how sh*t works. they don't know that a gun ban won't affect criminals because they get their guns illegally anyway. they just want to have some sort of reassurance that there will be less of them on the street. "joe the plumber" and your average soccer mom in the suburbs don't know sh*t, they just don't want guns around and politicians feed them what they want.
[/quote]

A violation of civil rights? If you can tell me one other legitimate thing that a person could do with an illegal gun ill buy that. They lost their right when they took the gun.
So you think 25 years is strict for trying to kill someone?







Thats the same amount of time Lou Pearlman got. And he didn't try to KILL someone. 
I do agree with you about them not knowing though. That's where all this confusion comes from.

Why does everyone seem to think you can just go around buying guns and reporting them stolen? lol You would lose money with every gun you sell number one. And number two how many times do you think you can do that before they start looking into you?


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

febsalien said:


> A violation of civil rights? If you can tell me one other legitimate thing that a person could do with an illegal gun ill buy that. They lost their right when they took the gun.
> So you think 25 years is strict for trying to kill someone?
> 
> 
> ...


it doesn't matter dude. for all you know they might change their mind and realize that what they planned to do with the gun is not what the want to do anymore. when you start delving into the idea of arresting and charging people with crimes that they *might* have committed is bordering on fascism.

and yes, considering my friend was only 16 at the time and got charged as an adult, it's pretty strict. i'm not saying it's wrong, just stating that it's strict. i also know that my friend's friend (another gang banger), killed his girlfriend on a camping trip. he punched her in the head twice over a drunken argument and she suffered internal bleeding then died in her sleep. he got 5 years for manslaughter when he was 19. compare that to 25 for shooting someone at 16 i'd say it's pretty strict. yeah, one was intending to kill while the other was not, the fact is that the girl died and the dude that got shot didn't.

i'm not sure where you are but sentences for firearm related crimes are not taken lightly in the state of california, especially in los angeles.


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

here's one more reason why the 2nd amendment should not be touched.

skip to 1:30






the black people were complaining about justice and claimed they were making a stand... really? preying on korean business owners and destroying the lives of people that EARNED their living despite their status as immigrants?

without their guns, the business owners at 1:30 in the vid would have fell victim just like the others... their wares stolen, their businesses burned to the ground and no government authority to turn to. when people say we don't or will not need guns is when i show this video.


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

Hyphen,
Was that the LA riots of like 1994ish? What happened to the Korean merchants? Any charges?

Would you have felt any different if it was black shop owners firing on korean looters?


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

Nick G said:


> stricter punishments for illegal traffic of firearms, stricter gun control (including bullets)
> even if it doesnt abolish the sale of illegal guns, it will drive the price of them up.
> take the money spent fighting marijuana and prostitutes and put it there.
> (and while we are at it, take the money fighting harder drugs and put it into drug prevention and treatment, locking people up doesnt seem to work... seems a little more sensical to have a heroin clinic that is clean, functional and open to anyone than for the cops fighting heroin to have shiny new cuffs and uber-overtime hours)
> ...


So punish me the law abiding citizen and make it harder for me to defend myself and my family?

So we punish responsible gun owners to reward crack addicts??? Your logic is SKEWED man....


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

Ex0dus said:


> Hyphen,
> Was that the LA riots of like 1994ish? What happened to the Korean merchants? Any charges?
> 
> Would you have felt any different if it was black shop owners firing on korean looters?


yeah, it was the la riots. no charges were pressed on merchants, what with the property being theirs and the state of the lapd at that time. they'd be hard pressed to arrest shop owners for defending something that the lapd refused defend.

if it were black shop owners shooting korean looters? same feeling. if you have something that you earned and worked hard for, *legally*, then i will always side with you over a criminal. race or ethnicity has nothing to do with it. there is a right and a wrong here and i have no feelings for looters or people out there for a hand-out. in fact i wish more of them had gotten their skulls blown open.

but, and there's a big but, how many times have koreans caused riots, looted their neighborhoods or literally beaten the life out of black people just for driving in their neighborhoods?


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

febsalien said:


> We don't need "gun control". As stated earlier the people committing these crime don't give twoshits about laws. So you can create all the laws you want IT WILL NOT AFFECT THEM! What we need is stricter punishment on violent crimes. There is only ONE reason for and individual to be carrying or even have a stolen gun........ to shoot someone. Why not charge people who are caught with these, with attempted murder? Why is it that someone can kill another human-being and not get the death penalty? Hell some of these guys do a few years then they're free?


because that's a violation of civil rights. if they didn't try to kill someone then you can't say they that did. i may want to steal that bar of candy but you can't cuff me for eyeballing it. there are already strict punishments in cali. a buddy of mine was packing a 9mm in his belt that was unloaded (no magazine) with nothing in the chamber (we were in jr. high and thought we were cool). he got caught with it and did an immediate 6mo stint at juvenile hall.

*another close friend of mine that i've known since elementary shot some dude on the freeway when he turned to gang banging in high school, he didn't kill him though. he's now serving 25 years with eligibility for parole in 20. pretty strict, i'd say.*

you have to understand that the people wanting these gun bans are people that don't know how criminals think or how sh*t works. they don't know that a gun ban won't affect criminals because they get their guns illegally anyway. they just want to have some sort of reassurance that there will be less of them on the street. "joe the plumber" and your average soccer mom in the suburbs don't know sh*t, they just don't want guns around and politicians feed them what they want.
[/quote]

A violation of civil rights? If you can tell me one other legitimate thing that a person could do with an illegal gun ill buy that. They lost their right when they took the gun.
So you think 25 years is strict for trying to kill someone?







Thats the same amount of time Lou Pearlman got. And he didn't try to KILL someone. 
I do agree with you about them not knowing though. That's where all this confusion comes from.

*Why does everyone seem to think you can just go around buying guns and reporting them stolen? lol You would lose money with every gun you sell number one. And number two how many times do you think you can do that before they start looking into you?*
[/quote]

number one, you'd make a huge ass margin, hell i can go down to petes in hudson NH and buy a shitty 12 gauge for 45 dollars (used of course). 45 dollars, you're going to try and tell me you can't turn that piece around for several hundred? the top 10 guns used in crime are all pieces of sh*t. compact type, cheap CHEAP weapons. look up the retail, brand new out of the box of anything in the top 10. some loser off the street could move an ounce of green and buy a gun no problem.

number two, you only have to do it once man, and honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if there are people out there who have had their guns "stolen" multiple times. if you catch my drift, without any type of investigation.


> because that's a violation of civil rights. if they didn't try to kill someone then you can't say they that did.


as far as this trash is concerned, if you fire off an illegal gun at someone, you're "trying" to kill them in the eyes of the law (and anyone who is reasonably sane). violation of civil rights? when you're tried and convicted of a felony, you surrender most of your rights.

once again to re-itterate. stricter guidelines for production, digitally encoded, micro chipped guns which can be traced from the time they leave the factory to the time they are found in the dumpster (as in, owners identity). i personally think that taxes on guns are rediculous, especially on automatic weapons, which are what, 200 bucks for a transfer? that sh*t has to stop, or it has to be used for better gun technology, not anti-gun measures. fingerprint safeties and such. as well as education courses. you could debate this issue until your blue in the face, but regardless, i've said my piece. that's my opinion. call me an anti-gun liberal hippie all you want, i dont really care about you, i care about the constitution.


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

Nick G said:


> The facts are the vast majority of gun owners do not commit crimes with their guns. We are decent, law abiding people who operate our firearms in a safe, responsible manner. It is not fair, in any sense, to punish an innocent majority for the crimes of a few.


then why?: 


> Firearms are the second leading cause of traumatic death related to a consumer product in the United States and are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24. Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 2003 alone, 30,136 Americans died by gunfire: 16,907 in firearm suicides, 11,920 in firearm homicides, 730 in unintentional shootings, and 232 in firearm deaths of unknown intent, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries.


some interesting statistics about handguns for self defense:


> Self Defense
> 
> For every time a gun in the home is used in a self-defense homicide, a gun will be used in-
> 
> ...


and because i know the next question is "source?"
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/hgbanfs.htm

that site is anti-NRA (so some of you may just turn it off right away and say its biased), but all their facts are referenced.
[/quote]

News flash... those "stats" have been cherry picked...

in 1997 Florida implemented their right to carry laws and after that several states followed. Ohios right to carry law is only 4 years old.

My point... Pick an unbiased "source".


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

r1dermon said:


> *
> as far as this trash is concerned, if you fire off an illegal gun at someone, you're "trying" to kill them in the eyes of the law (and anyone who is reasonably sane). violation of civil rights? when you're tried and convicted of a felony, you surrender most of your rights. *
> 
> once again to re-itterate. stricter guidelines for production, digitally encoded, micro chipped guns which can be traced from the time they leave the factory to the time they are found in the dumpster (as in, owners identity). i personally think that taxes on guns are rediculous, especially on automatic weapons, which are what, 200 bucks for a transfer? that sh*t has to stop, or it has to be used for better gun technology, not anti-gun measures. fingerprint safeties and such. as well as education courses. you could debate this issue until your blue in the face, but regardless, i've said my piece. that's my opinion. call me an anti-gun liberal hippie all you want, i dont really care about you, i care about the constitution.


um, read more? he didn't say if you "fire" an illegal gun at someone. and i quote...



> There is only ONE reason for and individual to be carrying or even have a stolen gun........ to shoot someone. Why not charge people who are caught with these, with attempted murder?


and yes, charging someone for attempted murder for simply possessing a gun that isn't his is a violation of rights.


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

hyphen said:


> Hyphen,
> Was that the LA riots of like 1994ish? What happened to the Korean merchants? Any charges?
> 
> Would you have felt any different if it was black shop owners firing on korean looters?


yeah, it was the la riots. no charges were pressed on merchants, what with the property being theirs and the state of the lapd at that time. they'd be hard pressed to arrest shop owners for defending something that the lapd refused defend.

if it were black shop owners shooting korean looters? same feeling. if you have something that you earned and worked hard for, *legally*, then i will always side with you over a criminal. race or ethnicity has nothing to do with it. there is a right and a wrong here and i have no feelings for looters or people out there for a hand-out. in fact i wish more of them had gotten their skulls blown open.

but, and there's a big but, how many times have koreans caused riots, looted their neighborhoods or literally beaten the life out of black people just for driving in their neighborhoods?
[/quote]

Oh im not gonna say I disagree with anything you said above







I just wanted your opinion. Im glad to hear the merchants were not charged


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

amen to that.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

> ...2003 alone, 30,136 Americans died by gunfire..


Ouch. That's alot of people. Until you take into account that there are 80,000,000 (yes I mean 80 million) gun owners in America.
Divide 30,136 by 80,000,000 and you get what? .0003767
That means that in 2003 there was one death for every 30,000 gun owners.
Like I said, the VAST majority of gun owners do not commit crimes.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Ex0dus said:


> News flash... those "stats" have been cherry picked...
> 
> in 1997 Florida implemented their right to carry laws and after that several states followed. Ohios right to carry law is only 4 years old.
> 
> My point... Pick an unbiased "source".


only stats that you are going to believe are ones taken by NRA, which i doubt keeps records like this ... look at the links i posted earlier (in a previous post, from the justice dept. ) they show the same basic thing.


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

Piranha Dan said:


> > ...2003 alone, 30,136 Americans died by gunfire..
> 
> 
> Ouch. That's alot of people. Until you take into account that there are 80,000,000 (yes I mean 80 million) gun owners in America.
> ...


i think it's closer to 50 million. it's still less than 1% though.


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

Nick G said:


> News flash... those "stats" have been cherry picked...
> 
> in 1997 Florida implemented their right to carry laws and after that several states followed. Ohios right to carry law is only 4 years old.
> 
> My point... Pick an unbiased "source".


only stats that you are going to believe are ones taken by NRA, which i doubt keeps records like this ... look at the links i posted earlier (in a previous post, from the justice dept. ) they show the same basic thing.
[/quote]

CDC?

You are punishing me because the extreme measure you would like to see enacted will mean higher prices for firearms and RIDICULOUS prices for ammo. Ive sold guns in private sales before, I prefer to deal with fellow ccw'ers, but I have refused sales to people in the past due to the fact I dont feel "right" about them.

Im all for lowering the crime rate in America, but we as Americans always attack the problem the wrong way. We need to attack the criminals who are committing the crimes, not the law abiding citizens. Im all for lowering the #1 killer from guns as well... self inflected. That problem starts at home. Far to often in todays America, parents feel it is the schools responsibility to make their heathens responsible adults. This imo is the #1 issue inm regards to American society today... Our parenting skills, as a whole, f*cking BLOW!

Nick,
I dont have an issue with the stats from the website, but feel the stats were cherry picked. Like I said earlier, 1997 is basically the birth of true gun rights to private American citizens. Its a fact that in Florida, the years when concealed carry was made legal, violent crime dropped HUGE.


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

r1dermon said:


> once again to re-itterate. stricter guidelines for production, digitally encoded, micro chipped guns which can be traced from the time they leave the factory to the time they are found in the dumpster (as in, owners identity). i personally think that taxes on guns are rediculous, especially on automatic weapons, which are what, 200 bucks for a transfer? that sh*t has to stop, or it has to be used for better gun technology, not anti-gun measures. fingerprint safeties and such. as well as education courses. you could debate this issue until your blue in the face, but regardless, i've said my piece. that's my opinion. call me an anti-gun liberal hippie all you want, i dont really care about you, i care about the constitution.


That'll never happen. Only a handful of states require you to register your gun, the rest will never do it. Especially with the economy the way it is. It's not cheap to start or maintain a program like that. Besides, a lot of people won't even bother registering, and criminals sure as hell won't.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

hyphen said:


> > ...2003 alone, 30,136 Americans died by gunfire..
> 
> 
> Ouch. That's alot of people. Until you take into account that there are 80,000,000 (yes I mean 80 million) gun owners in America.
> ...


i think it's closer to 50 million. it's still less than 1% though.
[/quote]
Yea, I got that 80,000,000 of the NRA's website so I figured it might be "overestimated". Even with 50,000,000 instead of 80,000,000, you're still talking thousands of people who own guns verses one or two that commit crimes with them.
Know what annoys me the most? The fact that that number is almost impossible to find. Not to sound like a conspiracy theroist or anything but it's like no one wants you to know. I searched "Official" websites for about 2 hours (Justice Dept. ATF etc) trying to get an "official" talley of gun owners in the US but nobody "official" seems to have this info available. Maybe the ATF's afraid of getting made into the AT?


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

Piranha Dan said:


> > ...2003 alone, 30,136 Americans died by gunfire..
> 
> 
> Ouch. That's alot of people. Until you take into account that there are 80,000,000 (yes I mean 80 million) gun owners in America.
> ...


i think it's closer to 50 million. it's still less than 1% though.
[/quote]
Yea, I got that 80,000,000 of the NRA's website so I figured it might be "overestimated". Even with 50,000,000 instead of 80,000,000, you're still talking thousands of people who own guns verses one or two that commit crimes with them.
Know what annoys me the most? The fact that that number is almost impossible to find. Not to sound like a conspiracy theroist or anything but it's like no one wants you to know. I searched "Official" websites for about 2 hours (Justice Dept. ATF etc) trying to get an "official" talley of gun owners in the US but nobody "official" seems to have this info available. Maybe the ATF's afraid of getting made into the AT?:laugh:
[/quote]

Here's another statistic to put yours into perspective:



http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/11856.php said:


> An average of *195,000 people* in the USA died due to potentially preventable, in-hospital medical errors in each of the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to a new study of *37 million patient records* that was released today by HealthGrades, the healthcare quality company.


That's 6x the number of firearms related deaths.

Hrm, 30,000 out of 50,000,000 versus 195,000 out of 37,000,000.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

Wow....HOSPITALS kill more people then guns do.....damn dude I'm as pro gun as they come and even I never would've guessed that.
If we really want to save lives, we should make a law that says people can only go to one hospital a month.:laugh:


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

:laugh:


----------



## JD7.62 (Apr 7, 2005)

Those buy back programs are a joke. I remember a couple years ago several people bought some old rusted commbloc surplus handguns from an importer for $15-20ea and then turned them in and got like $100 gift cards for each gun! Haha talk about sticking it to the man!

Some one mentioned regulating ammo...f*ck THAT! If you do that, that ONLY hurts sport shooters. It takes only one bullet to kill. I use to shoot easily 1,000 rounds a month, but with current ammo prices Im lucky to shoot 100 rounds a month. Throw regulation into the already high ammo prices, and you will effectively kill the sport. Sadly that is what many of the left wing ding-bats are realizing and doing. Is easier to go after ammo then the guns. I wish we could get a federal ruling that ammo is protected by the second amendment.


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

I'm tired of all this backdoor bullcrap. Take WA's ccw for instance. We're a shall issue state so you can't be denied if you meet the requirements. Well some of the more anti-gun cities make it very inconvenient to get your license. Some of these cities will only allow you to apply and be fingerprinted on Wednesdays, between the hours of 9am-10am, which they also set aside as the only time for other fingerprinting needs.

My state is a shall issue state set forth by our state constitution. I'm tired of these idiots trying to loop-hole their way around crap, if they don't like it then change the constitution. Otherwise stfu.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Ex0dus said:


> CDC?
> 
> You are punishing me because the extreme measure you would like to see enacted will mean higher prices for firearms and RIDICULOUS prices for ammo. Ive sold guns in private sales before, I prefer to deal with fellow ccw'ers, but I have refused sales to people in the past due to the fact I dont feel "right" about them.
> 
> ...


alright you guys have a point, ill give you that. I still believe that something needs to be done to regulate guns, but i think that a more creative solution may be needed to protect people like you all who shoot as a hobby from being screwed if prices are raised. 
I dont have a solution to that. But I dont think that we should sit on our hands.

why i enjoy this site is because so many perspectives I have never been exposed to. Never have i known someone who even owns a gun, except my boy who just got home from the marines.
Closest i have come to a non-policemans gun is getting robbed twice at gunpoint.

edit: i also got my shooting merit badge in boyscouts with those .22 rifles when i was a kid.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

Nick G said:


> Closest i have come to a non-policemans gun is getting robbed twice at gunpoint.
> edit: i also got my shooting merit badge in boyscouts with those .22 rifles when i was a kid.


That sucks dude. After hearing that I can almost see where you're coming from.


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Piranha Dan said:


> do you doubt that this happens ALL the time? the number 1 gun used in crime is a domestically manufactured one.


Nope. Not at all. I bet it happens all the time. Now tell me how making me wait 3 days to buy a gun, only letting me buy one gun a month, and banning me from owning certain types of guns for the most idiotic reasons is going to stop that.
I'm not saying the system doesn't have room for improvement. I'm saying that the improvements need to be made where they'll make a difference. Why isn't the guy falsely reporting a crime and grinding the serial numbers off guns (also a crime) in jail?
[/quote]

because a person doesn't become a "bad guy" or criminal until the very second he decides to shoot people, or imo, use it as some sort of "self reliance" in place of his balls. Stricter regulations and ban's on "certain weapons" would deter "anyone" that imo are more prone to a criminal mentality or "accidents" based on their weapon preference. I know profiling might make me a prick :laugh:, never said I didn't love my bushmaster but I'll eat a complete ban on all assault weapons for the sake of being politically correct :laugh:. Doesn't matter whether you live in south central or in the middle of the woods, weapon preference will tell you a lot about an individual. It would tell you the morons I speak about are no better then your average gangbanger, and yes a preemptive ban on certain weapon types would sort out the real sportsmen and the fear mongers/retards and help deter crime period.


----------



## mori0174 (Mar 31, 2004)

Liquid said:


> do you doubt that this happens ALL the time? the number 1 gun used in crime is a domestically manufactured one.


Nope. Not at all. I bet it happens all the time. Now tell me how making me wait 3 days to buy a gun, only letting me buy one gun a month, and banning me from owning certain types of guns for the most idiotic reasons is going to stop that.
I'm not saying the system doesn't have room for improvement. I'm saying that the improvements need to be made where they'll make a difference. Why isn't the guy falsely reporting a crime and grinding the serial numbers off guns (also a crime) in jail?
[/quote]

because a person doesn't become a "bad guy" or criminal until the very second he decides to shoot people, or imo, use it as some sort of "self reliance" in place of his balls. Stricter regulations and ban's on "certain weapons" would deter "anyone" that imo are more prone to a criminal mentality or "accidents" based on their weapon preference. I know profiling might make me a prick :laugh:, never said I didn't love my bushmaster but I'll eat a complete ban on all assault weapons for the sake of being politically correct :laugh:. Doesn't matter whether you live in south central or in the middle of the woods, weapon preference will tell you a lot about an individual. It would tell you the morons I speak about are no better then your average gangbanger, and yes a preemptive ban on certain weapon types would sort out the real sportsmen and the fear mongers/retards and help deter crime period.
[/quote]

I don't know why I still read your posts, but each one I read just further proves that you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. A gun is a gun is a gun is a gun. Ban the guns you think are politically incorrect, so what? It doesn't lower the amount of gun violence. People don't become criminals or a "bad guy" until they pull the trigger? That is complete nonsense and almost so stupid that it doesn't warrant a response. Deterrence does not occur by banning a type of gun. Criminals are criminals, regardless of whether they need to use a gun or not. You place way too much value in the gun as a tool of crime. Crime is much more complicated than you seem to think.


----------



## Curley (Aug 4, 2004)

dont most of the murders here in the US happen with revolvers and other handguns? Not Ar-15's and other assualt rifles? I dont see why they should ban assualt rifles, even though they can carry multiple bullets I dont really see anyone trying to hide one in thier waiste line like a pistol. It does not really matter what the government does, there has been to many guns produced and spread around already in the US. It has always been easy to get a gun legal or illegal. Even though I think some guns laws are great becuase they do deter some crime. Guns are fun to plink and hunt but I agree there are millions of retards that abuse that right.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Piranha Dan said:


> dont most of the murders here in the US happen with revolvers and other handguns? Not Ar-15's and other assualt rifles? I dont see why they should ban assualt rifles, even though they can carry multiple bullets I dont really see anyone trying to hide one in thier waiste line like a pistol. It does not really matter what the government does, there has been to many guns produced and spread around already in the US. It has always been easy to get a gun legal or illegal. Even though I think some guns laws are great becuase they do deter some crime. Guns are fun to plink and hunt but I agree there are millions of retards that abuse that right.










not sure what you are trying to say


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

I'm sorry Liquid, but sometimes your posts are almost as hard to understand as Cueballs posts.


----------



## gixxer6 (Oct 8, 2008)

gamgenius said:


> *The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. . . . waiting for attack!*
> 
> *The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental. *
> 
> ...


i agree with everything in your post except this pic










did u steal it from anothr website? i could be wrong.


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

mori0174 said:


> do you doubt that this happens ALL the time? the number 1 gun used in crime is a domestically manufactured one.


Nope. Not at all. I bet it happens all the time. Now tell me how making me wait 3 days to buy a gun, only letting me buy one gun a month, and banning me from owning certain types of guns for the most idiotic reasons is going to stop that.
I'm not saying the system doesn't have room for improvement. I'm saying that the improvements need to be made where they'll make a difference. Why isn't the guy falsely reporting a crime and grinding the serial numbers off guns (also a crime) in jail?
[/quote]

because a person doesn't become a "bad guy" or criminal until the very second he decides to shoot people, or imo, use it as some sort of "self reliance" in place of his balls. Stricter regulations and ban's on "certain weapons" would deter "anyone" that imo are more prone to a criminal mentality or "accidents" based on their weapon preference. I know profiling might make me a prick :laugh:, never said I didn't love my bushmaster but I'll eat a complete ban on all assault weapons for the sake of being politically correct :laugh:. Doesn't matter whether you live in south central or in the middle of the woods, weapon preference will tell you a lot about an individual. It would tell you the morons I speak about are no better then your average gangbanger, and yes a preemptive ban on certain weapon types would sort out the real sportsmen and the fear mongers/retards and help deter crime period.
[/quote]

I don't know why I still read your posts, but each one I read just further proves that you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. A gun is a gun is a gun is a gun. Ban the guns you think are politically incorrect, so what? It doesn't lower the amount of gun violence. People don't become criminals or a "bad guy" until they pull the trigger? That is complete nonsense and almost so stupid that it doesn't warrant a response. Deterrence does not occur by banning a type of gun. Criminals are criminals, regardless of whether they need to use a gun or not. You place way too much value in the gun as a tool of crime. Crime is much more complicated than you seem to think.
[/quote]

Just because you're kind of slow doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. And you made my case for me. The fact is here in America, you can "think" about shooting someone all you want but it doesn't make it a crime until you actually pull the trigger. So given that, and you addressing that "criminals are a lot more complicated then I seem to think", and that a gun is a "tool", which I might add only two purposes are for sport and crime. I'm saying based on "weapon (gun) type of choice" you can profile intent and whose more prone to criminal behavior . Big difference in the mentality of someone wanting to own a 30-06 and someone who wants a more concealable calico or ak-47 folding stock optional. Ever hear about someone going on a rampage, shooting up a school, or having a gang war with a 30-30?:laugh: This sort of profiling would be deemed by some as "politically incorrect" and would somehow violate second amendment yahoo's their rights. Which is complete nonsense and flat out hypocrisy when at the same time it is perfectly ok for our law to profile vehicle types or race or style of dress. Which I have absolutely no problem with.

But, it is perfectly ok to profile and pull over a cherry red sports car or an old beat up van out of suspicion, or to profile a sports car "dangerous" and hike up the insurance on it. Perfectly fine to search, siege, or interrogate based on suspicion of intent with out cause. But it is not ok to profile and regulate tools with only "two" purposes. To kill and for sport, that any dumb ass off the street can walking into walmart and purchase.. While we're at it. If it is an "absolute" must as an ordinary citizen, not law enforcement or on duty security gaurds ect., to walk around full time with a ccw and are, I'm assuming, still living in the age of plastic(credit cards) and atms lol. If you still "have" to walk around with a ccw other then to target or to the range, because you absolutely "have" to carry large amounts of money on you at all times. How about needing to have liability insurance along with you and your second amendment right. Again only "two" purposes for this tool that you absolutely must have on you at all times and one of them is to kill. This way if you and your second amendment right one day decide to have a brain fart or an "accident" over just being plain retarded. Immediate compensation will be made other then your own personal ass being in a sling.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

As both a hunter and a guy who likes to punch paper at the range, I'm into a little bit of everything. Own the following:
Remington Model 700 30-06
Marlin .22
Marlin 30-30 lever action
Chinese SKS 
Remington Over-Under 12 Gauge
(2) S&W Bicentenial .357's
Magnum Research BFR chambered for S&W .500.
Profile me.


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Piranha Dan said:


> As both a hunter and a guy who likes to punch paper at the range, I'm into a little bit of everything. Own the following:
> Remington Model 700 30-06
> Marlin .22
> Marlin 30-30 lever action
> ...


:laugh: you like your steak lightly seasoned and medium-rare dabbed with worcester sauce with a bit of a-1 on the side. Tossed salad with extra chuncky blue cheese dressing which makes you slightly erratic but fairly balanced and places you at about a 5 on eccentric range with a range of 10. One more large bore side piece or easily concealed and outdated SKS would put you over the top and place you as a medium risk potato head, slightly under cooked but no longer baked..


----------



## Ex0dus (Jun 29, 2005)

Guns dont play sports not do they commit crimes...

People can use guns for those purposes, but at the same time, guns can be used to save lives.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

Liquid said:


> :laugh: you like your steak lightly seasoned and medium-rare dabbed with worcester sauce with a bit of a-1 on the side. Tossed salad with extra chuncky blue cheese dressing which makes you slightly erratic but fairly balanced and places you at about a 5 on eccentric range with a range of 10. One more large bore side piece or easily concealed and outdated SKS would put you over the top and place you as a medium risk potato head, slightly under cooked but no longer baked..











I like revolvers but never saw the point of paying the same price and getting a .22 instead of something bigger (which unless you're buying some POS is what you're going to do). 
That SKS is an old gun, but she's a beaut. About as cherry as something that old can be and shoots like a laser. Great range gun for when I'm feeling old fashioned. Easily concealed?







How the hell do you conceal a roughly 3' long rifle?!


----------

