« First « Previous Comments 811 - 850 of 1,448 Next » Last » Search these comments
AmericanKulak says
Government workers at their best: even if these people decided to keep couple (or ten) full-auto AR's for themselves they sure as shit would've moved them elsewhere before contacting ATF.
Looks like a stupidity test that the couple failed...
Weird choice of a weapon to say the least: if you carry a big effin pistol, why have it in .22?
richwicks says
They burned their clothing along with them, but not their shoes
I think they went into their zyklon shower naked.
I'd rather have a .22 hand gun than a .44 magnum. Fire one of those in the dark, and your only senses that still work are your eyes, once it recovers from the muzzle flash in a few seconds...
richwicks says
I'd rather have a .22 hand gun than a .44 magnum. Fire one of those in the dark, and your only senses that still work are your eyes, once it recovers from the muzzle flash in a few seconds...
Fact check: true
https://patrick.net/post/1314395/2018-03-13-trying-out-a-44-magnum
(Reuters) - A federal judge in West Virginia has ruled that a federal ban on possessing a gun with its serial number removed is unconstitutional, the first such ruling since the U.S. Supreme Court dramatically expanded gun rights in June.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin in Charleston found Wednesday that the law was not consistent with the United States' "historical tradition of firearm regulation," the new standard laid out by the Supreme Court in its landmark ruling.
The decision came in a criminal case charging a man, Randy Price, with illegally possessing a gun with the serial number removed that was found in his car. The judge dismissed that charge, though Price is still charged with illegally possessing the gun after being convicted of previous felonies.
A lawyer for Price and a spokesperson for the office of U.S. Attorney William Thompson in Charleston, which is prosecuting the case, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The federal law in question prohibits anyone from transporting a gun with the serial number removed across state lines, or from possessing such a gun if it has ever been transported across state lines.
Serial numbers, first required by the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, are intended to prevent illegal gun sales and make it easier to solve crimes by allowing individual guns to be traced.
Price argued that the law is unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court's June 24 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc v. Bruen. That ruling held that under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the government cannot restrict the right to possess firearms unless the restriction is consistent with historical tradition.
Bruen said serial numbers were not required when the Second Amendment was adopted in 1791, and were not widely used until 1968, putting them outside that tradition.
(Reporting By Brendan Pierson in New York, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Nick Zieminski)
RWSGFY says
Weird choice of a weapon to say the least: if you carry a big effin pistol, why have it in .22?
So you don't go temporarily deaf once you fire it. A .22 is not BB gun. Unless you hit a lucky spot, it's not going to kill a person right away, but it's a serious disabler.
I'd rather have a .22 hand gun than a .44 magnum.
RWSGFY says
Weird choice of a weapon to say the least: if you carry a big effin pistol, why have it in .22?
So you don't go temporarily deaf once you fire it. A .22 is not BB gun. Unless you hit a lucky spot, it's not going to kill a person right away, but it's a serious disabler.
I'd rather have a .22 hand gun than a .44 magnum. Fire one of those in the dark, and your only senses that still work are your eyes, once it recovers from the muzzle flash in a few seconds...
after a day of training with carbine, i lose hearing for good 5 to 6 hours.
FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden says
after a day of training with carbine, i lose hearing for good 5 to 6 hours.
Your ear protection equipment is inadequate then.
Eric Holder says
FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden says
after a day of training with carbine, i lose hearing for good 5 to 6 hours.
Your ear protection equipment is inadequate then.
i don’t wear any. in real combat no time to get comfortable
FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden says
Eric Holder says
FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden says
after a day of training with carbine, i lose hearing for good 5 to 6 hours.
Your ear protection equipment is inadequate then.
i don’t wear any. in real combat no time to get comfortable
Real military guys in real combat wear ear and eye protection all the time. And what if you don't ever get to go into real battle but still go deaf? Would it be worth it?
False dichotomy: the Beretta is not even avalable in .44 magnum (which is a revolver caliber anyway). It was originally created as a "wonder nine" and is perfectly manageable, mild-shooting even, and has a very respectable 17-round capacity in it's original chambering. And no, .22 is not considered as a "serious disabler" by anyone. That's why no police department would have it as a duty caliber. Being a rimfire cartridge it's also relatively unreliable which is not a good trait in a defense caliber.
after a day of training with carbine, i lose hearing for good 5 to 6 hours.
I think the best protection against a home intruder is a shotgun with bird shot. It probably won't kill them, but it sure as hell will hurt them.
richwicks says
I think the best protection against a home intruder is a shotgun with bird shot. It probably won't kill them, but it sure as hell will hurt them.
That's my main defense at the moment. I think it probably will kill them at the close range of within a house, but part of the idea is also not to kill any neighbors by accident.
It's pretty deafening as well, but I don't know what to do about that.
FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden says
after a day of training with carbine, i lose hearing for good 5 to 6 hours.
This is foolish for you to do. You're going to go deaf.
If I can't have my own M134, assault rifle, and some RPG's, then freedom has no meaning.
What shotgun did you go with?
richwicks says
FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden says
after a day of training with carbine, i lose hearing for good 5 to 6 hours.
This is foolish for you to do. You're going to go deaf.
100%
I have a family member that’s been losing his hearing over the last decade (gradually) and it’s been particularly difficult on him. Don’t take hearing for granted. Life get significantly harder if you can’t hear what’s around you.
I really want a 12 pounder cannon.
« First « Previous Comments 811 - 850 of 1,448 Next » Last » Search these comments
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Couple things to note in there:
1. The specific mention of a militia being the reason for the need to bear arms.
2. The 2nd Amendment never mentions the word gun at all.
So, what exactly is the definition of "arms"?
In 1755 Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language was first published. It defined “arms” as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence.”
Weapons of offence would seem to include pretty much anything and everything, from knives to nuclear weapons. The US has already seen fit to ban some weapons of offence so the 2nd Amendment clearly has not been interpreted strictly as meaning that the US cannot ban all "arms". Therefore, the 2nd Amendment does not guarantee citizens the right to own whatever weapons they choose.
So it then becomes a question of which weapons should be banned, which should be strictly regulated, and which should be lightly regulated or not at all. Like anything else, we should weigh an individual's right with society's right. When looked at in that manner, it becomes very difficult to justify why fully automatic or semi automatic rifles should be allowed. What purpose do they serve an individual? And why would that purpose outweigh the extreme damage those weapons have cased society??
Patrick thinks the Chamber of Commerce is the worst organization, and he may be correct, but the NRA is not far behind.