How a Bump Stock works

Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
LEDandCoffee said:
See, THESE are the dumbest fucking arguments out there. Nuclear bombs, tanks, and bazookas have NOTHING to do with civilian guns. So fucking stupid lmao
Click to expand...
It was meant to be funny. I'm glad it got a laugh out of you. I'm laughing too. At you, not with you but at least we are both laughing.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
LEDandCoffee said:
Look man, it's quite clear this website is the only way you get human interaction. So you're clearly quite confused as to how the world really works. I feel bad for you honestly. Pretty sad
Click to expand...
i remember it like it was just yesterday.

it was your very first full day as a sock puppet. you were making bad arguments and crying when people called you names and insulted you. and now you are crying and lashing out like an upset child and insulting people.

oh, that was yesterday. nevermind.

anyhoo, welcome new member.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
somedude584 said:
Not sure how that statistic (which I can't find replicated, by the way) has anything to do with my comment.

The narrative is false. The narrative, spurred largely in part by the media and special interest groups, is that "assault weapons" are a menace, leading to untold deaths, when statistically that does not stand up to scrutiny. Semi-automatic rifles account for a small percentage of gun related homicides.

Look, I'm not debating whether or not these instances of insane individuals taking the lives of many deserve being addressed. They do. I just question how, and why, the focus is on semi-automatic rifles, when they are a statistical blip in terms of gun related homicides. Not only that, but the crazy kid could have more easily concealed multiple handguns and killed more with a handgun than with an AR-15 style rifle.

I'm not saying ban handguns, either, although there is certainly less of a justifiable reason for owning them (you can't hunt with a handgun). Guns aren't the root cause of these atrocities and we all know it, so lets quit ignoring that.
Click to expand...
literally 20 seconds and here it is: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/12/4/9850572/gun-control-us-japan-switzerland-uk-canada

Except I got it wrong. US gun homicide rate is 5x of the rate in Canada and 25x that of Aus.

You know, it's not really a matter of cold stats when it comes to the kind of damage Cruz did to the community. An entire community is traumatized when there is a mass shooting in a school. The kids in the school, all them are affected. People like me wonder why anybody wants a rifle that can hurt so many people, disrupt so many lives in such a short period of time.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
false.

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2521

American voters support stricter gun laws 66 - 31 percent

67 - 29 percent for a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons;

you are very stupid. your arguments are bad.

i'd be embarrassed
Click to expand...
These guys don't get it. We didn't have that kind of support for gun control and bans on assault weapons until now. We may have reached the tipping point. Politicians can't ignore this kind of super majority of non gun owners and rational gun owners. Not now, because congress needs to be cleaned out first but soon there will be changes.
 
LEDandCoffee

LEDandCoffee

Well-Known Member
It's not myself that doesn't get it.

In what world do you live in where criminals and mentally ill people follow the law? Lmao. Seriously. It's not rocket science.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
LEDandCoffee said:
Assault weapons have been banned since the 1950's. Too bad, so sad.

Assault is a verb dumbass.
Click to expand...
Agreed. You guys have been trained to make this argument and you aren't wrong. Canada doesn't ban the weapon, they restrict magazine capacity. For example:

Magazines designed to contain centre-fire cartridges and designed or manufactured for use in a semiautomatic handgun are limited to 10 cartridges. The capacity is measured by the kind of cartridge the magazine was designed to contain. In some cases the magazine will be capable of containing more than 10 rounds of a different calibre; however, that is not relevant in the determination of the maximum permitted capacity.[31]

The maximum permitted capacity of a magazine is determined by the kind of firearm it is designed or manufactured for and not the kind of firearm that might actually use it. As a consequence, the maximum permitted capacity remains the same regardless of which firearm it might be used in. Example: The Marlin Camp Carbine chambered for .45 ACP uses magazines designed and manufactured for the M1911 pistol, therefore the seven- and eight-round capacities are permitted. A similar example is the 10-round capacity magazine for the Rock River Arms LAR-15 pistol, regardless of the kind of firearm it is actually used in.[31]

Many common magazines are manufactured to hold more rounds than law allows in Canada. These magazines must be permanently altered so they no longer hold more than the number of rounds allowed by law. Acceptable ways to alter a magazine are set out in the Criminal Code Regulations.[30]


Common AR-15 30 round magazines that have been pinned to 5 rounds
More complete listing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Canada

I regret posting that wall of text but you keep spouting nonsense to deflect and I figured why not. Maybe you it will cut down on the number of your dumb posts.
 
LEDandCoffee

LEDandCoffee

Well-Known Member
Look, we're never going to see eye to eye on this because I'm trying to debate a subject I know a lot about. While you two clearly know next to nothing about.

I'm quite convinced you two have never shot a gun. No point in further continuing this.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
LEDandCoffee said:
Magazine capacity is irrelevant. It takes 3 seconds to swap a magazine. There's no argument there.
Click to expand...
You keep talking as if there is no proof that these laws work. You preach a belief. I'm saying there are plenty of examples were gun control laws work just fine.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
LEDandCoffee said:
Magazine capacity is irrelevant. It takes 3 seconds to swap a magazine. There's no argument there.
Click to expand...
jared loughner was only stopped during his tucson massacre when he dropped a magazine going to change it out and got tackled.

if magazine capacity were limited to 15, he would have only done half the damage he did. but he had a full 30 shots and managed to kill several kids using bullets 16-30.

then there is adam lanza, whose inability to change a magazine quickly allowed dozens of children to escape to safety.

let's not forget about james holmes, whose 100 round drum got jammed up while he was mowing down a movie theater full of innocent people, saving countless lives.

yes, it is easily verified that your arguments are truly fucking terrible and bad.

i'd be embarrassed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top