Dave_Shotgun
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Ford Nation! :)
Do You Support Ownership of FA (full auto) Firearms?
- Thread starter blaxsun
- Start date
LOL responsible gun owner have no use for 15" mag feed shotguns
So a single crime in the last 20 odd years is justification for you to support banning something?
I got bad news about your shotguns, revolver and semi auto 9. They get used in crime orders of magnitude more than any full auto or even all full autos combined.
But you dont support banning them because you own them
Talk about hypocrisy
Shawn
Last edited:
Dave_Shotgun
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Ford Nation! :)
Full auto machine guns are not used in more crimes because they are much harder to acquire than shotguns, rifles or handguns. But the amount of damage that they can cause makes them prohibited. I bet if the parliament hill shooter had a full auto, the outcome would have been different. All it takes is one nut-job and we're all screwed. Should grenades and rocket launchers be legal to own as well?
What's the point in this conversation... I can think of a dozen better things to work towards in terms of "firearm rights" than allowing FA... wilderness carry, removal of the entire ATT system, removal of the restricted class, castle law...
Shot a "machine gun" at a range in Vietnam... meah.
Shot a "machine gun" at a range in Vietnam... meah.
Really? LOL
You can make an SKS full auto with your belt loop and thumb. It is available and easily acquired. The reason it is not used it is ineffective.
You watch way too much TV. And also it is happened in Quebec with full auto
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Lortie
And that is different than any other gun how?
Sorry dude but your BS holds no water. Just admit that you dont like it so no one can have it. It is totally ok for you too not want it, the issue is you trying to make it so no one can.
Shawn
The bad guys killed a total of 0 people with their super deadly weapons.
- Location
- East of Home, West of the Rest
So responsible gun owners aren't responsible enough to own firearms you don't approve of?
All the arguments you've made against FA can be used against semi-autos. Give the antis an inch, they take a mile. Back in 1977, no one was even talking about banning semis. Look what's happening now. Next it will be pump, lever and bolt action.
Those of you who said No or Maybe, give your head a shake. FA should be non-restricted like all other firearms.
Personally, I believe that where we are as a nation in regards to firearms is more or less where we should be. I think some effort needs to be put towards refining some of our laws and regulations (read: Liberals, don't you dare bring back pointless ATTs), but we are otherwise doing ok and here is why: 1) There is a CLEAR distinction between legal and illegal firearms. The VPD published a report back in 2014 (I think) that stated that 97% of firearms related crimes that occur within Vancouver are committed with illegal firearms procured through criminal means. Keep in mind the number of gun crimes is quite low to begin with, but that is a fantastic number to see! It was a bit of a sign to the general (un-gun aware) public that we, the legal, are not the problem. 2) Building off that clear distinction between legal and illegal firearms (calling it that because we all know, or at least should all know, the difference), we also have the magazine capacity laws. Yes, yes, we would all love to have 100 round drums, BUT again it gives us leverage when entering discussions about firearms. Many times I have stood up in my college classes and talked about these issues. People ask about high capacity magazines and I can say with confidence that any that are used here are used illegally. I am a responsible gun owner, I follow the law and I don't shoot anything other than paper, plastic, or metal targets. The issue at hand here is fully automatic firearms. Yup, I agree a machine gun would be sweet... But, I'm willing to vote that down in favour of keeping my sport alive and in reasonable limits. I really don't see the point, regardless of price or regulations, in owning something that is designed to shoot in such a manner. We're just going to demonize ourselves. It's unfortunate, but we have to keep in mind that what we do is seen as "evil" to a lot of people. So really, I'll take the leverage in the conversations about how our laws keep the "dangerous" and "deadly" guns off our shelves and I'll continue to use them as an example of what the criminals have vs. what the legals have. Yes, true, most crimes are committed with semi-autos BUT automatics are often found in criminal stockpiles, they don't necessarily have to be "used" in a crime to still be there and be a viable threat to "public safety." I'd rather people fear "machine guns" and leave our semi-autos and etc alone.
As another point, I had a very interesting discussion where I compared the legalization of marijuana to the sport of shooting. Some "stoners" and "casual users" in class had brought up the issue of guns, and how "bad" they were. I asked them about how they felt about the prohibition of pot, and how some people think marijuana is bad. Of course, they all groaned and said it was stupid because they know it's not the best thing to do (and understand the risks) yet is no more dangerous than alcohol, so why not just let them have what they enjoy? So the discussion goes on, and they explain all their feelings and I ask why some people drive while high. They all, again, admit how stupid a choice it is because people can get hurt. This is where I take over, and say "Well, I enjoy guns. So why, as people who understand a struggle to fight for something they enjoy, would you try to take that away from me? Sure, once in a while, some idiot does a bad thing and people get hurt. These are rare incidences, though, we're talking a handful or less a year, and we (as firearms owners) all have at least a basic education in safe firearm handling/storage/general care. We know better, and almost the entirety of the firearm owning population would never dream of using their gun(s) for the purpose of hurting another person, just as the vast majority of marijuana users would never drive while high. There are risks involved with everything, and that's just how the world works. So why try to stop something you don't like or understand, simply because you don't like or understand it?"
Needless to say, a few light bulbs went on during that discussion. Long story short, I now have several new friends who can't wait for me to take them shooting (while they are sober, of course!) hahaha
As another point, I had a very interesting discussion where I compared the legalization of marijuana to the sport of shooting. Some "stoners" and "casual users" in class had brought up the issue of guns, and how "bad" they were. I asked them about how they felt about the prohibition of pot, and how some people think marijuana is bad. Of course, they all groaned and said it was stupid because they know it's not the best thing to do (and understand the risks) yet is no more dangerous than alcohol, so why not just let them have what they enjoy? So the discussion goes on, and they explain all their feelings and I ask why some people drive while high. They all, again, admit how stupid a choice it is because people can get hurt. This is where I take over, and say "Well, I enjoy guns. So why, as people who understand a struggle to fight for something they enjoy, would you try to take that away from me? Sure, once in a while, some idiot does a bad thing and people get hurt. These are rare incidences, though, we're talking a handful or less a year, and we (as firearms owners) all have at least a basic education in safe firearm handling/storage/general care. We know better, and almost the entirety of the firearm owning population would never dream of using their gun(s) for the purpose of hurting another person, just as the vast majority of marijuana users would never drive while high. There are risks involved with everything, and that's just how the world works. So why try to stop something you don't like or understand, simply because you don't like or understand it?"
Needless to say, a few light bulbs went on during that discussion. Long story short, I now have several new friends who can't wait for me to take them shooting (while they are sober, of course!) hahaha
- Location
- East of Home, West of the Rest
1) Criminals have high capacity mags. Regardless of mag capacity laws.
2) All manner of guns exist in Canada. To think there aren't legally owned full autos, and illegally imported full autos in this country is a fools game.
3) It is a crime to own any gun in this country without the governments approval. Yet criminals still possess guns. the government could revoke every PAL tomorrow and criminals would still have and actively obtain guns.
2) All manner of guns exist in Canada. To think there aren't legally owned full autos, and illegally imported full autos in this country is a fools game.
3) It is a crime to own any gun in this country without the governments approval. Yet criminals still possess guns. the government could revoke every PAL tomorrow and criminals would still have and actively obtain guns.
Exactly my point! Though legally owned full autos are very rare and cannot legally be fired, they do exist in small numbers. The mag capacity laws give the legals leverage, as I stated before, and a distinction between criminals and legal owners. I covered all your points in my little rant, as I assume your post was directed at me.
Personally, I believe that where we are as a nation in regards to firearms is more or less where we should be. I think some effort needs to be put towards refining some of our laws and regulations (read: Liberals, don't you dare bring back pointless ATTs), but we are otherwise doing ok and here is why: 1) There is a CLEAR distinction between legal and illegal firearms. The VPD published a report back in 2014 (I think) that stated that 97% of firearms related crimes that occur within Vancouver are committed with illegal firearms procured through criminal means. Keep in mind the number of gun crimes is quite low to begin with, but that is a fantastic number to see! It was a bit of a sign to the general (un-gun aware) public that we, the legal, are not the problem. 2) Building off that clear distinction between legal and illegal firearms (calling it that because we all know, or at least should all know, the difference), we also have the magazine capacity laws. Yes, yes, we would all love to have 100 round drums, BUT again it gives us leverage when entering discussions about firearms. Many times I have stood up in my college classes and talked about these issues. People ask about high capacity magazines and I can say with confidence that any that are used here are used illegally. I am a responsible gun owner, I follow the law and I don't shoot anything other than paper, plastic, or metal targets. The issue at hand here is fully automatic firearms. Yup, I agree a machine gun would be sweet... But, I'm willing to vote that down in favour of keeping my sport alive and in reasonable limits. I really don't see the point, regardless of price or regulations, in owning something that is designed to shoot in such a manner. We're just going to demonize ourselves. It's unfortunate, but we have to keep in mind that what we do is seen as "evil" to a lot of people. So really, I'll take the leverage in the conversations about how our laws keep the "dangerous" and "deadly" guns off our shelves and I'll continue to use them as an example of what the criminals have vs. what the legals have. Yes, true, most crimes are committed with semi-autos BUT automatics are often found in criminal stockpiles, they don't necessarily have to be "used" in a crime to still be there and be a viable threat to "public safety." I'd rather people fear "machine guns" and leave our semi-autos and etc alone.
As another point, I had a very interesting discussion where I compared the legalization of marijuana to the sport of shooting. Some "stoners" and "casual users" in class had brought up the issue of guns, and how "bad" they were. I asked them about how they felt about the prohibition of pot, and how some people think marijuana is bad. Of course, they all groaned and said it was stupid because they know it's not the best thing to do (and understand the risks) yet is no more dangerous than alcohol, so why not just let them have what they enjoy? So the discussion goes on, and they explain all their feelings and I ask why some people drive while high. They all, again, admit how stupid a choice it is because people can get hurt. This is where I take over, and say "Well, I enjoy guns. So why, as people who understand a struggle to fight for something they enjoy, would you try to take that away from me? Sure, once in a while, some idiot does a bad thing and people get hurt. These are rare incidences, though, we're talking a handful or less a year, and we (as firearms owners) all have at least a basic education in safe firearm handling/storage/general care. We know better, and almost the entirety of the firearm owning population would never dream of using their gun(s) for the purpose of hurting another person, just as the vast majority of marijuana users would never drive while high. There are risks involved with everything, and that's just how the world works. So why try to stop something you don't like or understand, simply because you don't like or understand it?"
Needless to say, a few light bulbs went on during that discussion. Long story short, I now have several new friends who can't wait for me to take them shooting (while they are sober, of course!) hahaha
I am not going to bother ripping this apart I am tired LOL
But I will say that basing you position on anything but the truth is a loosing proposition. And Being able to say look at me my mags are only ten rounds screw anyone that wants more will do nothing but eventually loose you everything.
Shawn
And are the reason for exactly zero crime
Its not leverage, it 100% pure BS based on nothing but emotion with exactly zero proven effect on anything, let alone crime or public safety
Mag laws do nothing to distinguish criminals from non criminals, the willingness of an individual to do criminal things does.
Shawn
- Location
- East of Home, West of the Rest
Really it isn't about what guns should be legal and what guns shouldn't. If you own guns there are people at work actively trying to take them away from you. Some of them are actually posting quite frequently in this thread. They believe that certain guns are too dangerous for anyone including themselves to own. What they fail to realize is, the people here that own those guns are legally allowed to do so and are as safe as anyone with them.
Sadly, once those people are gone, no one individual will be allowed to privately own full autos. Then the semi autos will be on the chopping block. Semi auto prohibition is already being pushed by the antis in this country. As most handguns are semi auto, that includes them in that march to prohibition.
And once the semi autos are handled, the pumps and levers will be next. Australia, a country more advanced in its gun control is currently pushing for that now. Perhaps revolvers will be thought of at this time.
If you can't see where this is going now, your already lost. This isn't a fight for guns, it is a fight for you, the individual, to be able to maintain part of your ability to be responsible for your own choices. To be allowed the right to participate in your sport and continue in this association of shooting sports.
That freedom of association is at risk. That freedom to choose this sport. This pastime.
Shame on you if you feel you are so superior to others, that you believe your opinion is of greater importance than their right to self determination.
Sadly, once those people are gone, no one individual will be allowed to privately own full autos. Then the semi autos will be on the chopping block. Semi auto prohibition is already being pushed by the antis in this country. As most handguns are semi auto, that includes them in that march to prohibition.
And once the semi autos are handled, the pumps and levers will be next. Australia, a country more advanced in its gun control is currently pushing for that now. Perhaps revolvers will be thought of at this time.
If you can't see where this is going now, your already lost. This isn't a fight for guns, it is a fight for you, the individual, to be able to maintain part of your ability to be responsible for your own choices. To be allowed the right to participate in your sport and continue in this association of shooting sports.
That freedom of association is at risk. That freedom to choose this sport. This pastime.
Shame on you if you feel you are so superior to others, that you believe your opinion is of greater importance than their right to self determination.
- Location
- East of Home, West of the Rest
You really are lost, aren't you. The distinction between myself, and criminals, is not determined by the capacity of my gun's magazine, or the action of my gun.
I'm getting the impression I'm the only one here who likes out firearms laws haha. I'm ok with that, I'm allowed to have my opinions as you are yours. We all like guns in the end! Please don't go accusing me of not basing my positions in the truth, as there are two sides to every discussion. I have not said "screw anyone", I've just said why I think it's a good idea to keep those particular restrictions. There is logic to what I'm saying, as there is to what others have said. Whether you choose to accept it is up to you, but don't discredit me with things I have not said.
Apparently people here have a difficult time accepting opinions that differ from their own, or for that matter understanding what others are trying to say. I won't bother explaining again, as I think a reasonable person could understand what I am saying and discuss it without throwing around insults. Anywho, I believe my experiment with CGN is just about over. People had warned me about the interactions on here, but I decided to give it a try anyway. I see why we, as a community, have such a difficult time getting anywhere. You seem to only hear (read) the things you want to out of what I have said, and continually come up with these conclusions that just aren't there. If something I have said is unclear, by all means ask. If you don't like what I have said, then sure, discuss away, but I don't deserve to be accused of being a fool, lost, etc etc. I also see we have differing opinions, and your opinions are based no more in fact than mine.
