Here it comes - gun control!!!

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
so then you beleive the government that pot is bad then!!!!!


Just because you beleive your ordinary citizian is uncapibable of using a firearm that means all are!
Are you drunk now? If so;

Based upon the amount of spelling and grammatical errors in that one sentence, I don't believe you should be able to brandish a keyboard, let alone a firearm, when buzzed.
 

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
  • You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to kpmarine again.
No one is trying to deny anyone the right to own a firearm, just trying to enforce proper usage and storage of them to prevent needless crimes.

When the 2nd was written the chances of you being robbed and your gun being used to rob someone else, were virtually zero. No regulation, at all,​ was necessary Do what you gotta do, essentially.

I'm not so sure the exact same context should apply 200 some odd years later.
I don't think you are trying to get rid of guns. With the number of guns we have in this country, enforcement would not be plausible I think though. Plus, you'd have to amend the constitution to get such a thing to be constitutional. The people that sell firearms and the people that buy firearms need to do their part to reduce the problems we can.Really, it's the most reasonable option. I'm sure you could get a lot of gun stores to sign on with such a thing if it was unilateral in an area.
 

Mindmelted

Well-Known Member
are you drunk now? If so;

based upon the amount of spelling and grammatical errors in that one sentence, i don't believe you should be able to brandish a keyboard, let alone a firearm when buzzed.
WHY BECAUSE YOU DO NOT REALIZE THAT AS LONG AS THE FIRST AND LAST LETTER ARE RIGHT YOU CAN READ It!

and that would be your dumbass fault.

Bet i could shoot better than you wasted.
 

Mindmelted

Well-Known Member
i don't think you are trying to get rid of guns. With the number of guns we have in this country, enforcement would not be plausible i think though. Plus, you'd have to amend the constitution to get such a thing to be constitutional. The people that sell firearms and the people that buy firearms need to do their part to reduce the problems we can.really, it's the most reasonable option. I'm sure you could get a lot of gun stores to sign on with such a thing if it was unilateral in an area.

and why not????
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
and that would be your dumbass fault.

Bet i could shoot better than you wasted.
Hard to say.

I shoot sub MOA @ 100 with my Thompson Center Encore Pro-hunter in .300 Win mag... 30 inch barrel.

She's mated with a Nikon Monarch 2.5-10x50mm scope. I'm not one of the best of the best by any means, but I was certified a 'marksman' in the Army, and I've been shooting since I was 3 years old.

I can shoot 5 rounds in a quarter(most of the time), at 100.... :)
 

Mindmelted

Well-Known Member
Hard to say.

I shoot sub MOA @ 100 with my Thompson Center Encore Pro-hunter in .300 Win mag... 30 inch barrel.

She's mated with a Nikon Monarch 2.5-10x50mm scope. I'm not one of the best of the best by any means, but I was certified a 'marksman' in the Army, and I've been shooting since I was 3 years old.

I can shoot 5 rounds in a quarter(most of the time), at 100.... :)


Army marksman is a fucking joke.......:lol:
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
  • You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to kpmarine again.
No one is trying to deny anyone the right to own a firearm, just trying to enforce proper usage and storage of them to prevent needless crimes and injuries.

Putting the responsibility in the store owners hands would;

A) Not leave the responsibility in the hands of the federal government to police citizens,
B) Ensure that storage laws were being followed, and proper techniques are being followed.
To the lettered, do you really think so? Usually regs inspire workarounds. Legislating "safe storage" won't make it hapen. What it will do (and why cops are cheering you on!) is give them another ace up their sleeve for their forfeiture programs. A drug bust (not necessarily even an arrest) and the state can take alllll your stuff. This sort of law will only serve to open up a new class of serendipitous violators to full-moose forfeiture. I don't like that at all. cn
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
So get gunshops to mandate a weapons handling course before they will sell someone a gun, get them to require proof of secure storage. Education would do a lot to solve these problems.
they do that with cars, yet look at all the "accidents" still happening.
What's your point? Life is dangerous, there are bad people, and laws clearly can't keep you safe from all of them.
Then I think one of us was confused as to which side of the fence the other was on. haha

at least one of us got it. ;)
 

Mindmelted

Well-Known Member
Nice man, you not only spelled everything correctly, but used capital letters.

Must be the X-mas spirit.

Care to post some of your targets you shoot? I'll gladly post mine.

Who the fuck keeps targets?

Only consided fucks do that!

I could if i wanted to be a consided fuck show you my robin hoods with a bow,If you know what the fuck that is!
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
Who the fuck keeps targets?

Only consided fucks do that!

I could if i wanted to be a consided fuck show you my robin hoods with a bow,If you know what the fuck that is!

ROFL - you're a joke.

Serious shooter, that claims to shoot pro while drunk, and doesn't keep targets. Riiiiiiiiiight....


Fuck off.... lol... joke.

I could probably shoot standing, one handed, @ 100 yards with my rem model 7 .243 better than you could prone at 25 yards, fuck stick.

Merry X-mas though! :D
 
Top