A Right to Bear Glocks?

[tonymctones]

Since I don't hunt, I don't own a gun, never had a desire to do so.

I think that people should legally own guns if that is what they desire.
The need to have a of ammo to shot 30 rounds serves no purpose for private citizens.
That would be the reason those clips are now illegal to purchase.

Sidebar.  Was anyone else carrying during the shooting spree?
If so, how did their weapon help the situation?
(just my curiosity since the state is quite liberal in gun laws.)
Sandra

you should try hunting it is good fun and quite fullfilling

its certainly not illegal to buy high cap mags right now...if it was how do you think he got his?

it was reported that some patrons returned fire as well as some security guards but i havent heard anything to confirm that.

not that it would have any bearing on this discussion

[Soul Crusher]

FYI - I prefer my G26 over all my others.  Great weapon. 

[Kazan]

FYI - I prefer my G26 over all my others.  Great weapon. 

Personally I don't like Glocks, but to each his own. My Springfield TRP is a nail driver, and it is only 7+1

[tonymctones]

FYI - I prefer my G26 over all my others.  Great weapon. 

prefer my ruger but the glock has night sights so thats whats closest to me at night.

[Soul Crusher]

I have thousands of rounds through both my G26 and even more through my G17 wo ever a jam or problem.

[tonymctones]

I have thousands of rounds through both my G26 and even more through my G17 wo ever a jam or problem.

i get jams in my glock but its probably due the magazine spring or to shooting reloads...

its always on the last or 2nd to last round in the mag that seems to jam

[muscleforlife]

you should try hunting it is good fun and quite fullfilling

its certainly not illegal to buy high cap mags right now...if it was how do you think he got his?

it was reported that some patrons returned fire as well as some security guards but i havent heard anything to confirm that.

not that it would have any bearing on this discussion

I actually like to get my meat from the markets. I'm city born and bred.
He could have got his before the law went into effect or black market(don't know)
If some patron/Security returned fire under duress and didn't hit him once.  He got a chance to reload, goes to show that having a firearm in a spontaneous firefight don't do shit.
Sandra

[tonymctones]

I actually like to get my meat from the markets. I'm city born and bred.
He could have got his before the law went into effect or black market(don't know)
If some patron/Security returned fire under duress and didn't hit him once.  He got a chance to reload, goes to show that having a firearm in a spontaneous firefight don't do shit.
Sandra

well if you ever get the chance to go i would encourage you to do so even if you think you wouldnt like it, you never know...

its NOT illegal to buy high cap mags...I think it was illegal to make them a while back and i dont even know if its still illegal to make them...think of it like the pro hormone bans...you could sell what you had in stock but couldnt get anymore...if he got them on the black market then that pretty much shows that bans dont do shit right?

LOL i knew thats were you were heading with that ignorance, so theres never been a situation where a spontaneous firefight has ended b/c of someone who was carrying?

you want to take this single instance if there indeed were ppl that fired back and use it to say that "goes to show that having a firearm in a spontaneous firefight don't do shit."

 

[muscleforlife]

well if you ever get the chance to go i would encourage you to do so even if you think you wouldnt like it, you never know...

its NOT illegal to buy high cap mags...I think it was illegal to make them a while back and i dont even know if its still illegal to make them...think of it like the pro hormone bans...you could sell what you had in stock but couldnt get anymore...if he got them on the black market then that pretty much shows that bans dont do shit right?

LOL i knew thats were you were heading with that ignorance, so theres never been a situation where a spontaneous firefight has ended b/c of someone who was carrying?

you want to take this single instance if there indeed were ppl that fired back and use it to say that "goes to show that having a firearm in a spontaneous firefight don't do shit."

 

I actualluy have a hard time culling fat from kidney, so killing my meat is not going to happen.
A vegetable garden, I am so there.

With some gun owners, they always think that they are going to take that "other" gun toter down. 
Sometimes even trained professionals panic in the heat of  moment.

At times, even professionals don't do shit.
It all comes down to that one moment in time.

Sandra

[tonymctones]

I actualluy have a hard time culling fat from kidney, so killing my meat is not going to happen.
A vegetable garden, I am so there.

With some gun owners, they always think that they are going to take that "other" gun toter down. 
Sometimes even trained professionals panic in the heat of  moment.

At times, even professionals don't do shit.
It all comes down to that one moment in time.

Sandra

its alot easier than you might think to clean a deer, turkey etc...

most ppl understand that the gun is the very last resort, ppl with concealed carries dont just pull their guns out and start firing at the first hint of trouble...there is a little tid bit of info that even if youre justified in shooting someone and you have your concealed carry youre still probably going to spend 15-20k in legal fees if you shoot and kill someone.

I agree, which is why trying to extrapolate a blanket statement from an isolated incident if there even were ppl that returned fire is ignorant...

[Parker]

It is “not suited for hunting or personal protection,” said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign. “What it’s good for is killing and injuring a lot of people quickly.”

WHAT???...what exactly would be good for protection...a flintlock...maybe a wrist rocket. These assholes need to shut the hell up. While I'm not in 240's league...its kinda weird how quickly all the Left were able to coordinate the Palin/2nd Amendment/Talk radio/Fox News attack plan...just sayin.

Apparently the flintlocks, like the one that killed Meriwether Lew (of Lewis and Clark fame) could do a lot of damage, as the bullet was 9 oz (I believe)

[240 is Back]

i get jams in my glock but its probably due the magazine spring or to shooting reloads...

its always on the last or 2nd to last round in the mag that seems to jam

1) Replace the mag springs
2) avoid shit reload ammo
3) Stop limp wristing when you shoot, tony

[tonymctones]

1) Replace the mag springs
2) avoid shit reload ammo
3) Stop limp wristing when you shoot, tony

1 been meaning to
2 its my pops reloads and it makes shooting cheaper, i keep hydroshocks in the mags when at home
3 lol what can i say  

[Soul Crusher]

Poll : Most (62% ) Say Stricter Gun Laws Would Not Help Prevent Shootings
Rasmussen Reports ^ | January 14, 2011 | Rasmussen Reports




Most Americans say stronger gun control laws are not the answer to the shootings last weekend of a U.S. congresswoman and the killing of six others.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, taken Monday and Tuesday nights, finds that only 29% of Adults think stricter gun control laws would help prevent shootings like the one in Arizona last Saturday. Sixty-two percent (62%) disagree and say stronger gun control would not make a difference. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Among those who have a gun in their household, 76% say stricter gun control laws would not help, a view shared by a plurality (48%) of those without a gun in the house.

Despite Saturday’s tragedy, opposition to gun control is at a new high. Thirty-six percent (36%) say the United States needs stricter gun control laws, but 56% don’t share that belief and oppose stronger anti-gun laws. Previously, opposition to more gun control has ranged from a high of 51% in July of last year to a low of 37% in April 2007 following the killings at Virginia Tech.


(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

[Soul Crusher]

[240 is Back]

it's terrifying by that rass report... that 36 percent of americans want stricter gun laws.

another columbine or shooting like that, and this number grows.  Once it flirts with 50 percent, shit....

[Soul Crusher]

it's terrifying by that rass report... that 36 percent of americans want stricter gun laws.

another columbine or shooting like that, and this number grows.  Once it flirts with 50 percent, shit....

As a populaton - we are fucking morons.   

What if loughner ran a U-Haul truck at 60 mph into the crowd and killed giffords.   Would we ban truk rentals?

[Benny B]

What if loughner ran a U-Haul truck at 60 mph into the crowd and killed giffords.   Would we ban truk rentals?

Stupid beyond all comprehension. 

[Soul Crusher]

Why.

[haider]

Why.

theres a reason guns were invented. its not exactly very efficient to go around running people over; as much as you would like to in your liberal town.

[Soul Crusher]

I live in nyc.  You are dead wrong on that.

[Soul Crusher]

 

[Soul Crusher]

BREAKING NEWS: California Court Rules Ammunition Ban AB962 Unconstitutional
 



"In a dramatic ruling giving gun owners a win in an National Rifle Association / California Rifle and Pistol (CRPA) Foundation lawsuit, this morning Fresno Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Hamilton ruled that AB 962, the hotly contested statute that would have banned mail order ammunition sales and required all purchases of so called “handgun ammunition” to be registered, was unconstitutionally vague on its face. The Court enjoined enforcement of the statute, so mail order ammunition sales to California can continue unabated, and ammunition sales need not be registered under the law."

Read more: http://cheaperthandirt.com/blog/?p=6086 

[Soul Crusher]

January 9, 2011
A Right to Bear Glocks?
By GAIL COLLINS

In 2009, Gabrielle Giffords was holding a “Congress on Your Corner” meeting at a Safeway supermarket in her district when a protester, who was waving a sign that said “Don’t Tread on Me,” waved a little too strenuously. The pistol he was carrying under his armpit fell out of his holster.

“It bounced. That concerned me,” Rudy Ruiz, the father of one of Giffords’s college interns at the time, told me then. He had been at the event and had gotten a larger vision than he had anticipated of what a career in politics entailed. “I just thought, ‘What would happen if it had gone off? Could my daughter have gotten hurt?’ ”

Giffords brushed off the incident. “When you represent a district — the home of the O.K. Corral and Tombstone, the town too tough to die — nothing’s a surprise,” she said. At the time, it struck me as an interesting attempt to meld crisis control with a promotion of local tourist attractions.

Now, of course, the district has lost more people in a shooting in a shopping center parking lot than died at the gunfight of the O.K. Corral, and the story of the dropped pistol has a tragically different cast.

In soft-pedaling that 2009 encounter, Giffords was doing a balancing act that she’d perfected during her political career as a rather progressive Democrat in a increasingly conservative state. She was the spunky Western girl with a populist agenda mixed with down-home values, one of which was opposition to gun control. But those protesters had been following her around for a while. Her staff members were clearly scared for her, and they put me in touch with Ruiz, who told me the story.

Back then, the amazing thing about the incident in the supermarket parking lot was that the guy with a handgun in his armpit was not arrested. Since then, Arizona has completely eliminated the whole concept of requiring a concealed weapon permit. Last year, it got 2 points out of a possible 100 in the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence state score card, avoiding a zero only because its Legislature has not — so far — voted to force colleges to let people bring their guns on campuses.

Today, the amazing thing about the reaction to the Giffords shooting is that virtually all the discussion about how to prevent a recurrence has been focusing on improving the tone of our political discourse. That would certainly be great. But you do not hear much about the fact that Jared Loughner came to Giffords’s sweet gathering with a semiautomatic weapon that he was able to buy legally because the law restricting their sale expired in 2004 and Congress did not have the guts to face up to the National Rifle Association and extend it.

If Loughner had gone to the Safeway carrying a regular pistol, the kind most Americans think of when they think of the right to bear arms, Giffords would probably still have been shot and we would still be having that conversation about whether it was a sane idea to put her Congressional district in the cross hairs of a rifle on the Internet.

But we might not have lost a federal judge, a 76-year-old church volunteer, two elderly women, Giffords’s 30-year-old constituent services director and a 9-year-old girl who had recently been elected to the student council at her school and went to the event because she wanted to see how democracy worked.

Loughner’s gun, a 9-millimeter Glock, is extremely easy to fire over and over, and it can carry a 30-bullet clip. It is “not suited for hunting or personal protection,” said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign. “What it’s good for is killing and injuring a lot of people quickly.”

America has a long, terrible history of political assassinations and attempts at political assassination. What we did not have until now is a history of attempted political assassination that took the lives of a large number of innocent bystanders. The difference is not about the Second Amendment. It’s about a technology the founding fathers could never have imagined.

“If this was the modern equivalent of what Sirhan Sirhan used to shoot Robert Kennedy or Arthur Bremer used to shoot George Wallace, you’d be talking about one or two victims,” said Helmke.

Giffords represents a pragmatic, interest-balancing form of politics that’s out of fashion. But, in that spirit, we should be able to find a way to accommodate the strong desire in many parts of the country for easy access to firearms with sane regulation of the kinds of weapons that make it easiest for crazy people to create mass slaughter. Most politicians won’t talk about it because they’re afraid of the N.R.A., whose agenda is driven by the people who sell guns and want the right to sell as many as possible.

Doesn’t it seem like the least we can do?