Fear of anti-gun legislation makes gun sales go through the roof in Colorado

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="Fightingfan"]

Does FBI work for you? As always people need to get out of their dream lands, and accept more gun laws do not matter. Criminals will get their guns no matter what.

AdamPA1006

Do you honestly think that criminals get their guns legally?? Find any source you want, a very high percentage of guns used in crimes are obtained illegally.

Criminals do not care about gun laws.

Actually not wanting to do anything about it because you're not willing to take a chance is actual cowardice. Basic freedoms are freedom of speach, the right to have basic food like bread and water, right to live in a safe environment and the right of education. Never is the ability to wear arms called a freedom. Just give up this misplaced freedom of your so in the future, incidents like these can be avoided. You're right anyone would say sorry to those families, yet 100m in the neighbourhood of the shooting a gunshop owner said that this would have never happened if someone in the audience was carrying a gun. How disrespectful is that? Laying the blaim on the victims themselves. The sick bastard had access to fully automated guns...to ensure he could kill as much as possible with a few clips. Now if there was a ban on guns, even on the black market it would be very difficult to get your hands on a fully automated gun. Let's say we live in a world with a ban on guns and he only got his hands on a single pistol. That would have killed considerably less people than the automated gun. America shouldn't be the one to spread their freedoms to the world like a veneral disease, with it's people taking family trips to the firing range.DrTrafalgarLaw

I'm willing to do plenty about it. Make concealed licenses more financially viable to get. You infringe on my right to live in a safe environment by taking away my firearms. By taking those away you give criminals the largesse to do whatever they want without reprisal.

I also believe that if someone in the first row of the theater had a firearm that this would have been prevented.

The shooter didn't have an automatic weapon. He had a semiauto AR-15, an 870 shotgun, and two .40 caliber glocks.

You should be ashamed for not wanting people to have the freedom to defend themselves. You would rather the victim of a crime die before the killing of a criminal. People like you disgust me.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="AdamPA1006"]Got a question for people. Did you know around 80-90% of guns used in crimes are illegal anyway? CRIMINALS dont follow gun laws lol! The laws only hurt law abiding gun owners. AdamPA1006

Does FBI work for you? As always people need to get out of their dream lands, and accept more gun laws do not matter. Criminals will get their guns no matter what.

And to that ghost guy: what % of guns were 'born' illegally, as in, never purchased/manufactured legally in the first place?

*sigh* This thread is a moron magnet. You're source was from 1997, try to find a more recent one.TheWalkingGhost

He's actually right. Our county(Rockland) in NY has a very, very, very low rate of crime being committed by people who legally own firearms. I'm a cop, it's a Sheriff's department briefing we get every six months.

I find it funny that people like you and others that are logically debating are being called stupid by people who think we can just up and ban guns, and then it will all be rainbows and kisses. One even pointed out about homemade explosives, which he used. Hilarious somebody with the burning flag called Americans stupid, but was stupid enough to miss all this. Classic. FYI, we all ready have a huge black market. Banning guns would make it worse.

TheWalkingGhost

Can never work is 'logical'? It's more just insanely thick.

And I've not said to outright ban guns, even though I'd be fine with that(in the long term), I know there must be a transition. But Mr. McCarthy here thinks nothing could ever work, that we should never bother trying, because it'll just never ever work.

---

I think our constitution (the amendments) could use a few changes,

Our nation 'does' need a well regulated militia, so that part of '2' can stay. It's the 'right to bear arms' for people in general that is outdated, it should be a privilege at most.

(6)"In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved"

This needs revision, should be based on a % of average household income of the prior year, not a static number (so as to not require later revisions)

And I think we could use an amendment to limit campaign contributions (subsantially), again to some % of the income of an average household of the prior year.

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="l4dak47"] Wat? Are you really this stupid? I was comparing what happened a few years ago to what's happening now with paranoid people buying more guns based on unfounded fears of gun control. It's a valid comparison to make. l4dak47

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]Actually not wanting to do anything about it because you're not willing to take a chance is actual cowardice. Basic freedoms are freedom of speach, the right to have basic food like bread and water, right to live in a safe environment and the right of education. Never is the ability to wear arms called a freedom. Just give up this misplaced freedom of your so in the future, incidents like these can be avoided. You're right anyone would say sorry to those families, yet 100m in the neighbourhood of the shooting a gunshop owner said that this would have never happened if someone in the audience was carrying a gun. How disrespectful is that? Laying the blaim on the victims themselves. The sick bastard had access to fully automated guns...to ensure he could kill as much as possible with a few clips. Now if there was a ban on guns, even on the black market it would be very difficult to get your hands on a fully automated gun. Let's say we live in a world with a ban on guns and he only got his hands on a single pistol. That would have killed considerably less people than the automated gun. America shouldn't be the one to spread their freedoms to the world like a veneral disease, with it's people taking family trips to the firing range.airshocker

I'm willing to do plenty about it. Make concealed licenses more financially viable to get. You infringe on my right to live in a safe environment by taking away my firearms. By taking those away you give criminals the largesse to do whatever they want without reprisal.

I also believe that if someone in the first row of the theater had a firearm that this would have been prevented.

The shooter didn't have an automatic weapon. He had a semiauto AR-15, an 870 shotgun, and two .40 caliber glocks.

You should be ashamed for not wanting people to have the freedom to defend themselves. You would rather the victim of a crime die before the killing of a criminal. People like you disgust me.

Why are gun owners so damn insecure?

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"][QUOTE="airshocker"]

No we don't, we're simply unwilling to give up our freedoms for something that won't even work. There is no way any amount of gun control can work in America. Our country is SATURATED with firearms. Bans on assault weapons prevents law-abiding citizens from obtaining them. Does nothing to stop criminals from getting them.

noscope-ak47

or because most likely people shooting back would have turned it into a worse situation.....Person0

Sorry, I trust my fellow gun owners. There are no more honorable and trustworthy people in the country than those who own firearms legally and continue to be allowed to carry them because they haven't committed any crimes.

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"]I find it funny that people like you and others that are logically debating are being called stupid by people who think we can just up and ban guns, and then it will all be rainbows and kisses. One even pointed out about homemade explosives, which he used. Hilarious somebody with the burning flag called Americans stupid, but was stupid enough to miss all this. Classic. FYI, we all ready have a huge black market. Banning guns would make it worse.

Inconsistancy

Can never work is 'logical'? It's more just insanely thick.

And I've not said to outright ban guns, even though I'd be fine with that(in the long term), I know there must be a transition. But Mr. McCarthy here thinks nothing could ever work, that we should never bother trying, because it'll just never ever work.

---

I think our constitution (the amendments) could use a few changes,

Our nation 'does' need a well regulated militia, so that part of '2' can stay. It's the 'right to bear arms' for people in general that is outdated, it should be a privilege at most.

(6)"In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved"

This needs revision, should be based on a % of average household income of the prior year, not a static number (so as to not require later revisions)

And I think we could use an amendment to limit campaign contributions (subsantially), again to some % of the income of an average household of the prior year.

[QUOTE="noscope-ak47"]

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"] What freedom is that? The freedom to kill anyone you want? Ownership of weapons is forbidden here. I don't need weapons to defend myself. I wouldn't wish for a weapon if someone points a weapon at me. I would wish my adversary would not have obtained that weapon to begin with. How do we do that? By banning guns. We're not f-ing soldiers, we're not in some private army or in a war, what kind of business would civilian have with a gun? Self-defence? Don't make my laugh. Guns are for cowards. Go join the military if you're into guns, maybe that way you'll learn the value of human life and how one's life is not worth taking for the sake of self-defence of your pitiful existence. Shoot all the virtual enemies with your virtual guns all you want, but only cowards use guns to fend themselves. True heroes use guns as a last means to save other's lives. Digusting how the world has devolved into savages that proclaim bearing arms is a constitutional right. Yes it is...that is if you are also willing to say that to the families of the deceased victims of this shooting. If you have credibility or any balls at all, you would say that to them.DrTrafalgarLaw

Can never work is 'logical'? It's more just insanely thick.

And I've not said to outright ban guns, even though I'd be fine with that(in the long term), I know there must be a transition. But Mr. McCarthy here thinks nothing could ever work, that we should never bother trying, because it'll just never ever work.

---

I think our constitution (the amendments) could use a few changes,

Our nation 'does' need a well regulated militia, so that part of '2' can stay. It's the 'right to bear arms' for people in general that is outdated, it should be a privilege at most.

Inconsistancy

Tell me how you would make it work, then. Step by step.

Our citizens need to have the right to protect themselves. Why are you so against people having that right? You do realize there are some states(like New York), that don't allow hardly any means for people to protect themselves?

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"]*sigh* This thread is a moron magnet. You're source was from 1997, try to find a more recent one.airshocker

He's actually right. Our county(Rockland) in NY has a very, very, very low rate of crime being committed by people who legally own firearms. I'm a cop, it's a Sheriff's department briefing we get every six months.

[QUOTE="Person0"]or because most likely people shooting back would have turned it into a worse situation.....airshocker

Sorry, I trust my fellow gun owners. There are no more honorable and trustworthy people in the country than those who own firearms legally and continue to be allowed to carry them because they haven't committed any crimes.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]So would you argue for the legality of an assault rifle that matches or exceeds the M249 in ROF and has the ability to augment with drum mags?airshocker

Cyclically you can't match the ROF of a 249 with the M4. The capabilities of the weapon system do not allow for it. The barrel would melt before you put half as many rounds through it. Would I agree that civilians don't really need a drum magazine? Sure, but on the other hand there are states that allow for such an item to be sold, so it's not very hard to get.

Just because you HAVE the capability to put large amounts of ammunition through a weapon doesn't mean you actually can. The gun can, and will, become so hot that rounds would go off before being properly seated in the barrel. That's a good way to get yourself killed.

good. The reason why we have the right to bare arms is to protect are self from out of control government.k2theswiss

[QUOTE="k2theswiss"]good. The reason why we have the right to bare arms is to protect are self from out of control government.MgamerBD

[QUOTE="k2theswiss"]good. The reason why we have the right to bare arms is to protect are self from out of control government.MgamerBD

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]What freedom is that? The freedom to kill anyone you want? Ownership of weapons is forbidden here. I don't need weapons to defend myself. I wouldn't wish for a weapon if someone points a weapon at me. I would wish my adversary would not have obtained that weapon to begin with. How do we do that? By banning guns. We're not f-ing soldiers, we're not in some private army or in a war, what kind of business would civilian have with a gun? Self-defence? Don't make my laugh. Guns are for cowards. Go join the military if you're into guns, maybe that way you'll learn the value of human life and how one's life is not worth taking for the sake of self-defence of your pitiful existence. Shoot all the virtual enemies with your virtual guns all you want, but only cowards use guns to fend themselves. True heroes use guns as a last means to save other's lives. Digusting how the world has devolved into savages that proclaim bearing arms is a constitutional right. Yes it is...that is if you are also willing to say that to the families of the deceased victims of this shooting. If you have credibility or any balls at all, you would say that to them.DrTrafalgarLaw

Cowardice is only being represented by you. No one in their right mind would say anything but they're sorry to the families who have lost loved ones. You must be deluded.

Everybody that owns a gun is trustworthy.... thats a strange thing to believe. Also trust does not have much to do with their ability to shoot back accurately and quickly enough to make a difference.Person0

Owns a gun legally. That's because you think people who own guns are evil. You're biased.

And that's why I also mentioned the front row. I don't expect someone who has just gotten their conceal to carry permit to be able to engage from fifty feet away. But 15, maybe 20? Sure, so long as they're not shooting through civilians.

[QUOTE="MgamerBD"]

[QUOTE="k2theswiss"]good. The reason why we have the right to bare arms is to protect are self from out of control government.TheWalkingGhost

I guess I fail the see the huge distinction that you do between both. You seem to be drawing the line at what I consider an arbitrary point. An AR that starts to over heat and melt after spitting out 50 round into a crowd is still something to behold, not to mention someone could easily carry multiple mags and reload if they wanted to. Its time for softball...won't be responding after this!HoolaHoopMan

The distinction is that the M249 can conceivably fire a couple thousand rounds before melting itself. The AR-15 can only fire, maybe, 600.

I'm not saying 50 rounds from either weapon won't be devastating, but the M249 will fire them faster and more accurately.

[QUOTE="Person0"]Everybody that owns a gun is trustworthy.... thats a strange thing to believe. Also trust does not have much to do with their ability to shoot back accurately and quickly enough to make a difference.airshocker

Owns a gun legally. That's because you think people who own guns are evil. You're biased.

And that's why I also mentioned the front row. I don't expect someone who has just gotten their conceal to carry permit to be able to engage from fifty feet away. But 15, maybe 20? Sure, so long as they're not shooting through civilians.

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]

Can never work is 'logical'? It's more just insanely thick.

And I've not said to outright ban guns, even though I'd be fine with that(in the long term), I know there must be a transition. But Mr. McCarthy here thinks nothing could ever work, that we should never bother trying, because it'll just never ever work.

---

I think our constitution (the amendments) could use a few changes,

Our nation 'does' need a well regulated militia, so that part of '2' can stay. It's the 'right to bear arms' for people in general that is outdated, it should be a privilege at most.

airshocker

Tell me how you would make it work, then. Step by step.

Our citizens need to have the right to protect themselves. Why are you so against people having that right? You do realize there are some states(like New York), that don't allow hardly any means for people to protect themselves?

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="MgamerBD"] lol...I love it when dumbass gun nuts say this. Like we have tanks and gunships in our backyards....MgamerBD

How do you know i don't own any guns? Any ways you own a gun so you are biased! Front row people are also the most vulnerable, the guy had surprise on his side so the people sitting down being surprised are the bad side to bet on.Person0

Because you have a rabid hatred for people that do? No, I'm not biased. I'm self-interested. It's in my best interests and quite frankly your own for me to be armed.

We'll never know for sure until we start allowing more than half a percentage of the population to carry their weapons concealed.

[QUOTE="noscope-ak47"]

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"] What freedom is that? The freedom to kill anyone you want? Ownership of weapons is forbidden here. I don't need weapons to defend myself. I wouldn't wish for a weapon if someone points a weapon at me. I would wish my adversary would not have obtained that weapon to begin with. How do we do that? By banning guns. We're not f-ing soldiers, we're not in some private army or in a war, what kind of business would civilian have with a gun? Self-defence? Don't make my laugh. Guns are for cowards. Go join the military if you're into guns, maybe that way you'll learn the value of human life and how one's life is not worth taking for the sake of self-defence of your pitiful existence. Shoot all the virtual enemies with your virtual guns all you want, but only cowards use guns to fend themselves. True heroes use guns as a last means to save other's lives. Digusting how the world has devolved into savages that proclaim bearing arms is a constitutional right. Yes it is...that is if you are also willing to say that to the families of the deceased victims of this shooting. If you have credibility or any balls at all, you would say that to them.DrTrafalgarLaw

Protect themselves from whom? Terrorists? Socialists? You're basically owning a gun to counter other that own a gun. So tell me, with this rise in gun sales, if more people own a gun...would you feel safer? The police is there to protect the civilians, we don't need people rising up in arms and being both the judge and executioner. But you would know better, since you work for the police. Just abolish the police and give everyone a gun if you're so confident in your fellow gun owners.DrTrafalgarLaw

Criminals. No, I'm owning a gun to protect people. Of course I feel safer with responsible people owning firearms. There's no reason not to.

The Police can't be everywhere at once, I know this because I'm a cop. We fully understand the necessity for people to protect themselves whenever appropriate. Nothing is worse than losing the life of a decent citizen.

Where did I saw gun owners could take over the role of the police? No where. They can simply augment the security of a community.

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="MgamerBD"] lol...I love it when dumbass gun nuts say this. Like we have tanks and gunships in our backyards....MgamerBD

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"][QUOTE="airshocker"]

Cowardice is only being represented by you. No one in their right mind would say anything but they're sorry to the families who have lost loved ones. You must be deluded.

noscope-ak47

[QUOTE="Person0"]How do you know i don't own any guns? Any ways you own a gun so you are biased! Front row people are also the most vulnerable, the guy had surprise on his side so the people sitting down being surprised are the bad side to bet on.airshocker

Because you have a rabid hatred for people that do? No, I'm not biased. I'm self-interested. It's in my best interests and quite frankly your own for me to be armed.

We'll never know for sure until we start allowing more than half a percentage of the population to carry their weapons concealed.

Saying that having a shoot out between multiple people in the middle of a crowded theater = a rabid hatred of people with guns? That doesn't make sense to me. No you're just biased everyone is, you can admit it. So until we have multiple shoot outs in areas between heavily armed gunmen and CCW holders being caught by surprise we won't know if CCW permits are good? That is a bad scientific experiment.Person0

Considering in every single thread about gun control I've seen you in you have never been for the rights of law-abiding citizens to own firearms, I'd say you are far more biased than I am. I can actually differentiate between certain weapons that should be illegal.

Again, we won't know for sure what will happen until it does. Also, apparently you're unaware of what some people with a CCW have been able to do to thwart crime.

He pretty much has the element of surprise, a lot of civilians running around and a dark environment to conceal his ass. If I read upon it right, he even had ballistics armor. Would you be confident in taking him on while you're picking that piece of popcorn between your teeth? The solution to this problems isn't more guns or more gun owners. It's gun ownership that's at fault to begin with. He even had a permit to carry guns ffs. Do something about the permits, like a 6 monthly psychological and physical examination for gun owners and stop selling heavy guns. Or just ban guns all together. You don't need to own guns as a civilian, you're not at war.DrTrafalgarLaw

Guns were not made specifically for warfare. Who are you to say people shouldn't own them? Besides a fascist, of course.

[QUOTE="Person0"]Saying that having a shoot out between multiple people in the middle of a crowded theater = a rabid hatred of people with guns? That doesn't make sense to me. No you're just biased everyone is, you can admit it. So until we have multiple shoot outs in areas between heavily armed gunmen and CCW holders being caught by surprise we won't know if CCW permits are good? That is a bad scientific experiment.airshocker

Considering in every single thread about gun control I've seen you in you have never been for the rights of law-abiding citizens to own firearms, I'd say you are far more biased than I am. I can actually differentiate between certain weapons that should be illegal.

Again, we won't know for sure what will happen until it does. Also, apparently you're unaware of what some people with a CCW have been able to do to thwart crime.

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"]*sigh* This thread is a moron magnet. You're source was from 1997, try to find a more recent one.airshocker

He's actually right. Our county(Rockland) in NY has a very, very, very low rate of crime being committed by people who legally own firearms. I'm a cop, it's a Sheriff's department briefing we get every six months.

Do you guys seriously think that criminals follow gun laws? Please someone answer that question!!!

Sorry, I trust my fellow gun owners. There are no more honorable and trustworthy people in the country than those who own firearms legally and continue to be allowed to carry them because they haven't committed any crimes.

airshocker

Agreed. Mike, you'll enjoy this.

[spoiler] http://www.patriotthoughts.com/2009/04/23/because-thats-all-the-ammunition-we-had/ [/spoiler]

Heres another source, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

Wake up people!!

More laws=more illegal guns, gune the government cant keep track of. Plain and simple.

And look at Chicago, some of the strictist gun laws in the country. The laws havent stopped ANY criminal.

[QUOTE="noscope-ak47"]

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"] Actually not wanting to do anything about it because you're not willing to take a chance is actual cowardice. Basic freedoms are freedom of speach, the right to have basic food like bread and water, right to live in a safe environment and the right of education. Never is the ability to wear arms called a freedom. Just give up this misplaced freedom of your so in the future, incidents like these can be avoided. You're right anyone would say sorry to those families, yet 100m in the neighbourhood of the shooting a gunshop owner said that this would have never happened if someone in the audience was carrying a gun. How disrespectful is that? Laying the blaim on the victims themselves. The sick bastard had access to fully automated guns...to ensure he could kill as much as possible with a few clips. Now if there was a ban on guns, even on the black market it would be very difficult to get your hands on a fully automated gun. Let's say we live in a world with a ban on guns and he only got his hands on a single pistol. That would have killed considerably less people than the automated gun. America shouldn't be the one to spread their freedoms to the world like a veneral disease, with it's people taking family trips to the firing range.DrTrafalgarLaw

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]Protect themselves from whom? Terrorists? Socialists? You're basically owning a gun to counter other that own a gun. So tell me, with this rise in gun sales, if more people own a gun...would you feel safer? The police is there to protect the civilians, we don't need people rising up in arms and being both the judge and executioner. But you would know better, since you work for the police. Just abolish the police and give everyone a gun if you're so confident in your fellow gun owners.airshocker

Criminals. No, I'm owning a gun to protect people. Of course I feel safer with responsible people owning firearms. There's no reason not to.

The Police can't be everywhere at once, I know this because I'm a cop. We fully understand the necessity for people to protect themselves whenever appropriate. Nothing is worse than losing the life of a decent citizen.

Where did I saw gun owners could take over the role of the police? No where. They can simply augment the security of a community.

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"][QUOTE="noscope-ak47"]Your a moron pretty sure anybody with training would have dropped and stopped his ass. His kill ratio was horrible in a turkey shoot. Also his weapons were semi-auto if he did not mod them.

noscope-ak47

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]He pretty much has the element of surprise, a lot of civilians running around and a dark environment to conceal his ass. If I read upon it right, he even had ballistics armor. Would you be confident in taking him on while you're picking that piece of popcorn between your teeth? The solution to this problems isn't more guns or more gun owners. It's gun ownership that's at fault to begin with. He even had a permit to carry guns ffs. Do something about the permits, like a 6 monthly psychological and physical examination for gun owners and stop selling heavy guns. Or just ban guns all together. You don't need to own guns as a civilian, you're not at war.airshocker

Guns were not made specifically for warfare. Who are you to say people shouldn't own them? Besides a fascist, of course.

Heres another source, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

Wake up people!!

AdamPA1006

Were all of those guns illegal since they began their existence? How many of those guns were bought legally at one time then became illegal, and resold/stolen?

Also, in that article: Obtained from friends or family 39.6%, how much of those were legally, or illegally, obtained?

And:Obtained on the street/illegal source 39.2%, this contradicts your previous statement of 80%, by a bit.

Claiming to source the Justice Department, and not having a link to the reference, or at least the name of the specific article referenced... @Justice.gov, not finding the specific values that I type in...

[QUOTE="noscope-ak47"]

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"] He pretty much has the element of surprise, a lot of civilians running around and a dark environment to conceal his ass. If I read upon it right, he even had ballistics armor. Would you be confident in taking him on while you're picking that piece of popcorn between your teeth? The solution to this problems isn't more guns or more gun owners. It's gun ownership that's at fault to begin with. He even had a permit to carry guns ffs. Do something about the permits, like a 6 monthly psychological and physical examination for gun owners and stop selling heavy guns. Or just ban guns all together. You don't need to own guns as a civilian, you're not at war.DrTrafalgarLaw

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]What freedom is that? The freedom to kill anyone you want? Ownership of weapons is forbidden here. I don't need weapons to defend myself. I wouldn't wish for a weapon if someone points a weapon at me. I would wish my adversary would not have obtained that weapon to begin with. How do we do that? By banning guns. We're not f-ing soldiers, we're not in some private army or in a war, what kind of business would civilian have with a gun? Self-defence? Don't make my laugh. Guns are for cowards. Go join the military if you're into guns, maybe that way you'll learn the value of human life and how one's life is not worth taking for the sake of self-defence of your pitiful existence. Shoot all the virtual enemies with your virtual guns all you want, but only cowards use guns to fend themselves. True heroes use guns as a last means to save other's lives. Digusting how the world has devolved into savages that proclaim bearing arms is a constitutional right. Yes it is...that is if you are also willing to say that to the families of the deceased victims of this shooting. If you have credibility or any balls at all, you would say that to them.airshocker

Don't be stupid. You know exactly which freedom I'm talking about. You've just confirmed you are actually an idiot, and a liar. Anybody would want a weapon with which to defend themselves with if they were being threatened and had no way of escape. It's human nature to defend ones life.

I used to be a "soldier", actually. Well, an airman, but it's a distinction without a difference in this conversation. I'm now a cop. I know the value of human life, which is why I would sleep perfectly fine at night if I had to kill someone in order to protect it.

Cowardice is only being represented by you. No one in their right mind would say anything but they're sorry to the families who have lost loved ones. You must be deluded.

You're insane.

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"][QUOTE="noscope-ak47"]You know nothing about me or how I was trained you also know nothing about muzzel flash or what a crack or pop means. You also know nothing about the diffrent types of body armour and how to defeat them. You also seem to think BA with out plates makes a person invincible. You don't know what weapons are on my hip and ankle and what physical shape I am in. If you want to think I am a fat hick that is scared of his own shadow knock yourself out. As for making sure gun owners have cheap training and are not section 8's I am all for that.

noscope-ak47