Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/4/2002 10:28:51 AM EDT
"[b][The 2nd Amendment is] subject to reasonable restrictions[/b] designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or [b]to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse.[/b]"- From the Ashcroft Justice Department, contained in a legal brief sent to the Supreme Court. Who is going to argue now that AR15's are not "particularly suited to criminal misuse"? 5 people are dead and you have the Justice Department AND Treasury Department declaring that an AR15 was used in these murders. It is time that you all hold your nose and voluntarily call for a ban on possession of your AR15s. It is the lesser of 2 evils because at least you will be able to keep the rest of your guns...for now.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 10:34:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 10:34:36 AM EDT
what 5 people?
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 10:41:51 AM EDT
What rifle?
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 10:43:09 AM EDT
Stop it.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 10:45:40 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 10:46:25 AM EDT
Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1: Imbrog, this alarmist thread is way premature, and, frankly, just bullshit. You do NOT know this will happen, and are just being silly. How about we cross bridges as we come to them? [;)]
View Quote
The bridge is out, the engineer doesn't care that the passengers are screaming for him to stop, and the train is about to go over the edge.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 10:48:05 AM EDT
Imbroglio is like a shotgun. Some of his stuff is on target ... some just flies right by.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 10:49:37 AM EDT
"our AR15s"??? I'm guessing that you don't own one? Yuck it up, 'cause if the government keeps prohibiting firearms by type or make/model, it won't be too long before they want your 10/22, .38, etc. -REAPER2502
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 10:59:10 AM EDT
Imbroglio is right. And after Ashcroft bans all AR-15s, he'll proceed to ban [b]dancing[/b]. [:D] ... leades to fornication, you know.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:01:28 AM EDT
I am just trying to help out the republican party members here. If we as gun owners step in and help get a ban passed before the democrats do, then the gop will have a good chance at getting more votes and even more importantly, majorities in the house and senate. I wish you all would look at the big picture for once.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:07:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbroglio:
Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1: How about we cross bridges as we come to them? [;)]
View Quote
The bridge is out, the engineer doesn't care that the passengers are screaming for him to stop, and the train is about to go over the edge.
View Quote
You know, Imbrog...I think that is probably the truest statement I've ever read here.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:09:49 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DK-Prof: Imbroglio is right. And after Ashcroft bans all AR-15s, he'll proceed to ban [b]dancing[/b]. [:D] ... leades to fornication, you know.
View Quote
Hella-Cool! It will be just like "Footloose", only with dancing [i]and[/i] guns!
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:14:26 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DK-Prof: Imbroglio is right. And after Ashcroft bans all AR-15s, he'll proceed to ban [b]dancing[/b]. [:D] ... leades to fornication, you know.
View Quote
No, no, no. It's fornication in the standing position that leads to dancing. [;)]
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:22:56 AM EDT
Hrm... ever wonder what a DU troll would sound like? Imbroglio the bong is not a substitute for your meds.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:27:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By BOFH: Imbroglio the bong is not a substitute for your meds.
View Quote
Bullshit. The bong is ALWAYS a substitute for meds. LivewireRC I get high, own guns, AND I VOTE! ;)
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:28:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/4/2002 11:29:21 AM EDT by maelcum]
Wake up, you ignorant fools. [url]http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-maryland-shootings-guns1004oct04,0,1447708.story?coll=sns%2Dap%2Dnationworld%2Dheadlines[/url]
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:43:10 AM EDT
Yep, in the next few days Sarah Brady and the rest of the fargin' Demorats will be in front of the cameras claiming that all weapons capable of firing a 223 round should be confiscated, destroyed and never produced for civilian use again. Personally I wouldn't doubt that this is the beginning of a terrorist trend. The fuzz will never catch the perps.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:45:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By maelcum: Wake up, you ignorant fools. [url]http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-maryland-shootings-guns1004oct04,0,1447708.story?coll=sns%2Dap%2Dnationworld%2Dheadlines[/url]
View Quote
And that story has to do with Ashcrufty trying to ban ARs how? The media is anti... DUH!! MD has an anti agenda... DUH!! A fair number of feebs have an anti agenda... DUH!! The quote Imbog is basing this thread on is one in which Ashcroft was defending his pro second amendment views to congress. Turning it into something anti is the essence of the big lie. Sorry, but the hyperbole is getting a bit thick.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:57:47 AM EDT
Post from Imbroglio -
I am just trying to help out the republican party members here.
View Quote
Somehow, I doubt that very much. [:D] You have always reminded me of that fellow on [i][b]Aliens[/b][/i], Pvt. Hudson (played by BillPaxton) who, in times of acute danger, is always running off and hollering stuff such as: 'Hey, you might not be up on current events, but we just got our asses kicked, Pal!' or 'This can't be happening, Man, this ain't happening!' [img]http://www.ozcraft.com/scifidu/images/aliens/b_paxton.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.ozcraft.com/cgibin/clipplay.cgi?images/aliens/current_events.rpm[/url] [url]http://www.ozcraft.com/cgibin/clipplay.cgi?images/aliens/happenin.rpm[/url] See if I'm right? [:D] Eric The(YouBetcha)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:59:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By BOFH: The quote Imbog is basing this thread on is one in which Ashcroft was defending his pro second amendment views to congress. Turning it into something anti is the essence of the big lie. Sorry, but the hyperbole is getting a bit thick.
View Quote
Uh, hello? The Ashcroft statement was not made before congress. IT WAS SENT IN A LEGAL BRIEF TO THE SUPREME COURT. [url]www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52223,00.html[/url] [url]www.ndol.org/blueprint/2002_jul_aug/26_shooting.html[/url]
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:59:53 AM EDT
THAT IS TOTAL B.S. TO POST THIS! I BET YOU WOULD SHIT IF SOMEONE POSTED A BAN ON .38S OR 10/22S
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 12:10:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By BOFH: The quote Imbog is basing this thread on is one in which Ashcroft was defending his pro second amendment views to congress. Turning it into something anti is the essence of the big lie.
View Quote
So, if the Minister of Love, Ashcroft, calls for "reasonable restrictions", he's defending the 2nd Amendment; and if the Brady Bunch, using almost literally the same phrasing, demands "reasonable restrictions", they are anti-gun?
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 12:14:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/4/2002 12:17:13 PM EDT by BOFH]
Ummm yeah, how about a link to the text of this brief. The links you posted are talking about Olson's brief on Emerson v. United States.(Widely regarded by dems as hysterically PRO second amendment.) [i]The current position of the United States ... is that the Second Amendment more broadly protects the rights of individuals, including persons who are not members of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to possess and bear their own firearms," [b]Solicitor General Theodore Olson wrote in two court filings this week.[/b] That right, however, is "subject to reasonable restrictions designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse." [/i] ... are you an unfit person imbog? Did the mean man keep you from purchasing that AAA gun you wanted to augment your 10/22 collection with? [edit] Kind of refreshing to be on the moderate side of this argument. [:D]
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 12:23:11 PM EDT
Yep, [b]Kar98[/b], just like that! We certainly can't have any 'reasonable restrictions' now, can we? If that's going to be the line of reasoning that you adopt in your argument, I can foresee nothing but a long series of defeats for the RKBA. I'm all in favor of Texas' CHL laws, which, as you might well guess, prohibits the public carrying of a handgun while the license holder is intoxicated. Some among us would call that an unreasonable restriction, while some might not. It's just too bad the Founding Fathers didn't put woman's right to choose alongside the RKBA in the Second Amendment. Our country could have been spared a lot of arguing if it had. Eric The(Reasonable)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 12:39:37 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DK-Prof: Imbroglio is right. And after Ashcroft bans all AR-15s, he'll proceed to ban [b]dancing[/b]. [:D] ... leades to fornication, you know.
View Quote
[size=6][green]Oh yeah,let him try![/green][/size=6] [img]http://assaultweb.net/ubb/emoticons/025.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 2:15:29 PM EDT
Montgomery County police said it was likely that the shots, described as .223-caliber bullets, were fired from a rifle such as a Colt AR-15 -- the semiautomatic, civilian version of the military M-16 assault rifle. Each of the victims shot Wednesday and Thursday was killed with a single bullet, police said. "We're dealing with someone shooting from a distance, someone using a high-velocity round," County Police Chief Charles Moose said Friday. While police would not say if they had recovered a bullet from any of the shooting scenes, Moose said police were 90 percent sure that a single .223 caliber round, shot from a rifle, was used in each killing.
View Quote
Yeah, this has a lot to do with Ashcroft.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 2:40:00 PM EDT
Time for a redirect! [b]EVIL PEOPLE[/b] commited these Murderous crimes! There is no such thing as Evil Guns!! The Media and the Sheeple are being whipped into a frenzy by ignorant and seditious lies and half truths. Last I knew we still have no idea what weapon fired the [b]evil bullets![/b] The dog and pony show with "suspected" weapons was truly in poor taste- and foolish, unless they intended to indite all American military, and Patriots, and sportsmen, and lump them with these Murderous Terrorists. Oh, by the way, they,(.223/5.56), are the same caliber bullets used to defend American interests and freedom worldwide for the last 40 years! How sad that such tactics and political shenanigans are used to distract the public from the fact that These Agencies are entirely unprepared to defend american citizens or protect them, even in their suburban residences.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 2:41:19 PM EDT
I know[;)] I dont have a .223....[;)]its a 556mm! You guys all think imbro's hollaring WOLF?.....like anti's hollar ban the gunz....better to be prepared/expect the worst....than not.
Link Posted: 10/4/2002 11:04:33 PM EDT
FCK them and ban all you want, fckers. WHo the FCK is gonna come and pick them up? We need more reporters to take trips to Pakistan.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 12:02:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/5/2002 12:03:42 AM EDT by The_Macallan]
I'm gonna go out on a limb here. Since we're all playing hypotheticals here I'll play out this hypothetical for ya'll: I would actually be willing to trade allowing another "assault weapon" ban to pass IF a couple of CONSERVATIVE Supreme Court justices could get appointed to the SCOTUS just to slap down that law and all other stupid federal & state gun banning laws once and for all. It's true that Ashcroft wrote, "to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse." If you want to speculate that he may now apply that description to AR15s... ...how does that coexist with the SCOTUS rulings in [i]US v. Miller[/i] and [i]Lewis v. US[/i] that, [i]"the Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that [u]does not have 'some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia[/u]"[/i] or that [i]"is any part of the [u]ordinary military equipment[/u] or that its use could contribute to the common defense"[/i] (which AR15s certainly do)? What I'm getting at is that it doesn't matter one bit what Ashcroft says or what new AWB is passed. What we NEED (and what I've been railing about for a long time) is a [u]clear and definitive[/u] ruling from the SCOTUS on the RKBA and to actually APPLY the [i]"is any part of the ordinary military equipment"[/i] reasoning of the [i]Miller[/i] and [i]Lewis[/i] cases to the blatantly unconstitutional 'assault weapon ban'. And THAT'S only gonna happen if we can pack the court with more CONSERVATIVES. If we can't get the SCOTUS to make a hard right turn, then all is lost anyway. We've already seen Bush sign what he considers an 'unconstitutional' law (CFR) knowing that the SCOTUS will take the flak for slapping it down. If he can pack the court with a few more strict constitutionalists, he may sign a new 'Assault Weapon' Ban KNOWING that "his" SCOTUS will once-and-for-all rule that such laws are unconstitutional. And by doing that, he gets to sign a bill that effectively disarms his liberal, gun-grabber-political opponents for the next election AND he gets to use his newly-packed SCOTUS to slap down that same bill as well those same liberal, gun-grabber-political opponents for good.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 1:23:25 AM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: If we can't get the SCOTUS to make a hard right turn, then all is lost anyway.
View Quote
All will never be lost if [b]WE[/b] NEVER give up our guns. When they come, give'em the bullets first and your life last, and take at least one with you. WE OUTNUMBER THEM!
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 6:25:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/5/2002 6:26:51 AM EDT by RipMeyer]
I hate to even open one of your threads. Your sarcasm is old and worn out to the point I really dont want to listen to you anymore. However I continue to think you may have something serious to say and read your thread anyway.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 7:36:50 AM EDT
Originally Posted By KEA:
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: If we can't get the SCOTUS to make a hard right turn, then all is lost anyway.
View Quote
All will never be lost if [b]WE[/b] NEVER give up our guns. [red]When they come, give'em the bullets first and your life last[/red], and take at least one with you.
View Quote
That is what I'd consider an "all is lost" scenario.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 8:04:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: I'm gonna go out on a limb here. Since we're all playing hypotheticals here I'll play out this hypothetical for ya'll: I would actually be willing to trade allowing another "assault weapon" ban to pass IF a couple of CONSERVATIVE Supreme Court justices could get appointed to the SCOTUS just to slap down that law and all other stupid federal & state gun banning laws once and for all. It's true that Ashcroft wrote, "to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse." If you want to speculate that he may now apply that description to AR15s... ...how does that coexist with the SCOTUS rulings in [i]US v. Miller[/i] and [i]Lewis v. US[/i] that, [i]"the Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that [u]does not have 'some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia[/u]"[/i] or that [i]"is any part of the [u]ordinary military equipment[/u] or that its use could contribute to the common defense"[/i] (which AR15s certainly do)? What I'm getting at is that it doesn't matter one bit what Ashcroft says or what new AWB is passed. What we NEED (and what I've been railing about for a long time) is a [u]clear and definitive[/u] ruling from the SCOTUS on the RKBA and to actually APPLY the [i]"is any part of the ordinary military equipment"[/i] reasoning of the [i]Miller[/i] and [i]Lewis[/i] cases to the blatantly unconstitutional 'assault weapon ban'. And THAT'S only gonna happen if we can pack the court with more CONSERVATIVES. If we can't get the SCOTUS to make a hard right turn, then all is lost anyway. We've already seen Bush sign what he considers an 'unconstitutional' law (CFR) knowing that the SCOTUS will take the flak for slapping it down. If he can pack the court with a few more strict constitutionalists, he may sign a new 'Assault Weapon' Ban KNOWING that "his" SCOTUS will once-and-for-all rule that such laws are unconstitutional. And by doing that, he gets to sign a bill that effectively disarms his liberal, gun-grabber-political opponents for the next election AND he gets to use his newly-packed SCOTUS to slap down that same bill as well those same liberal, gun-grabber-political opponents for good.
View Quote
I'll give you $10 if this actually happens all is lost
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 8:40:20 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407: all is lost
View Quote
So when do you committ suicide? And where do we send flowers?
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 8:49:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407: all is lost
View Quote
So when do you committ suicide? And where do we send flowers?
View Quote
To his house in 5-10-15 years when they come to pick up his rifles. Please DO NOT tell me an intelligent fellow like yourself believes there is even the slightest hope in this situation. At the very best, you can only hope to forestall the inevitable. You can depend on the media and the government to use incidents such as yesterday to forward their agenda. They are not even sure what type of rifle was used in this, and look what was paraded right out for the cameras.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 8:50:38 AM EDT
I cannot believe what I've been reading. This was started by an AR15.com member writing something to the tune of "give up your AR rifles so we can keep the 2nd amendment." What a brilliant tactic! Now the anti-gunners have stooped so low as to join AR15.com and put this nonsense on our beloved website posing as a pro 2nd amendment American. Look at all the other posts that supported the first one. Understand this: This great country is under seige! It is only a matter of time before the badguys do something else to harm the law abiding Citizens of The United States of America if they aren't doing it already. You don't take the rights of the masses for the crimes of the few! God forbid one of the residents of the communist state of Maryland have the ability to defend themselves from this horrible event. When the constitution was written it was conceived to protect the people from governments like the one King George ruled. Now it can protect us from those criminals that have taken the lives of Citizens of The United States. As far as I'm concerned they are just as much a clear and present danger to the freedoms granted to us in the bill of rights as Osama bin Laden. "Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it." You can't let go and still win! "Americans know we are a resilient people. Now, through our courage and resolve, we must remind the world of how precious freedom is and how relentlessly we will defend it.” “Yesterday, most Americans were going about their daily lives. Today we are at war.” Nuff said?
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 8:53:57 AM EDT
imbrog|io is just doing what the left does take something and spin the shit out of it. hang around here long enought and you will learn that.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 8:56:01 AM EDT
And if the shooter turns out to be a terrorist then by lunch time the next day, all the guns stores in America will be be sold out. Hmmmm.....
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 9:09:25 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DarkFuture: To his house in 5-10-15 years when they come to pick up his rifles. Please DO NOT tell me an intelligent fellow like yourself believes there is even the slightest hope in this situation. At the very best, you can only hope to forestall the inevitable. You can depend on the media and the government to use incidents such as yesterday to forward their agenda. They are not even sure what type of rifle was used in this, and look what was paraded right out for the cameras.
View Quote
If you say so. You obviously believe so passionately in this distopian future that I won't even try to argue with you. Me, I take a more realistic view.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 9:28:35 AM EDT
Originally Posted By green18: And if the shooter turns out to be a terrorist then by lunch time the next day, all the guns stores in America will be be sold out. Hmmmm.....
View Quote
Funny you say that, I just came back from the gun store, and I heard that the rush has already started, people that can legally carry are doing so .... waiting for copycats.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 9:40:28 AM EDT
Imbroglio ur just shiting us, RIGHT! Bluemax
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 9:48:14 AM EDT
The reasoning in the news article is really messed up. They simply say a high velocity round and a "small" bullet. Even though we know it was a .223 it also describes about half the centerfire rifle rounds on the market! I see this being blown way out of proportion in the news media. While this criminal was stalking and shooting 5 people I would hazard a guess that 20 people died in car accidents in that state. How did they know it wasnt a bolt action .223? Hold on to your AR's guys it going to be a rocky ride. Oh and dont be surprised if the price of .223 ammo doesnt skyrocket!
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 10:11:38 AM EDT
HIGH VELOCITY HIGH VELOCITY WTF DOSE THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING????? you can call every cal. bullet HIGH VELOCITY. im sick of reading that filth. They are just trying to make it sound like .223 or 5.56 is some evil HIGH VELOCITY bullet that nothing else comes close to matching. IT's PISSING ME OFF.
Montgomery County police said it was likely that the shots, described as .223-caliber bullets, were fired from a rifle such as a Colt AR-15 -- the semiautomatic, civilian version of the military M-16 assault rifle.
View Quote
yet they don't really know what kind of weapon it is because they don't have the the criminal or his weapon.
While police would not say if they had recovered a bullet from any of the shooting scenes, Moose said police were 90 percent sure that a single .223 caliber round, shot from a rifle, was used in each killing.
View Quote
BS, he should keep his fucking mouth shut until he knows for sure.
Beach said the rifles are easily found in gun stores.
View Quote
BS, he makes it sound as if you can walk in, pay for one and leave with it the same day. also not very many gun stores have ar15's. Hell, gander mountain wont even order AR parts.
Riehl said a person with reasonable shooting skills could fire the ammunition accurately from 150 yards away. The AR-15 has a much longer range.
View Quote
I can shoot over two thousand yards accurately with a .308, a .223 your lucky to get 450 with 55 grain bullets, and if it's a gusty day don't even try.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 10:13:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/5/2002 10:15:26 AM EDT by m60308nato]
These people are idiots. Almost as dumb as the person who pulled the trigger. I hope the basterd gets his face blown off, if we get another gun law cause of his ass, I will find him myself.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 10:35:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/5/2002 10:36:17 AM EDT by bountyhunter]
If we all, gun people are thinking this, can you imagine the rush of activity at HCI, this is indeed the end, or very close to it, just hope the government will have a buy back program that is fair, or close to it as possible, soon the next forum board will be Mdl.94 angle eject.com. Maybe we can all get together there till they get those banned.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 10:43:07 AM EDT
Didn't I just see a pic of an ATF agent holding an M96 on AOL?
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 10:52:40 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 11:00:56 AM EDT
[url]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29188[/url] HOMELAND INSECURITY [b]2 'Hispanics' sought in D.C.-area hunt Be-on-lookout alert describes shooters' race[/b] I think this is just a covert/polite way to say two dark skinned men, most likely of arab desent.
Link Posted: 10/5/2002 2:42:07 PM EDT
If it had been a shotgun that killed those people, would they be calling for a ban on those?
View Quote
Um, yeah. They want ALL firearms out of citizen's hands. They just do it one type at a time. Assault weapons, saturday night specials, whatever they think the public will fall for at the moment. Present Brady/Feinstein/Etc. with the option "we can get a shotgun ban passed today, yea or nay?" what do you think they will say?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top