N.j. Gun Buyback

[Astronomer]

ok i might get this post scratched... but i gotta say this... prolly gonna piss a few off...

 

but there is no reason to own guns in this day and age... if we stopped producing any type of weapon then we would not have all the senseless killings... i know i know... guns don't kill people ... people do... your wrong... people with weapons kill people. I know the USA has this thing entrenched in your constitution. I'm trying not to make this political, but its a fact. people with access to guns kill people. Many people will probably NOT be killed because those guns are now NOT on the street.

 

Most killings are a crime of passion... meaning they acted in a fit of rage... take the gun out of the picture and they have time to calm down... if they have access to a gun, then there is no time to think it through. I'm not trying to be difficult. It's a fact. There are a lot more killings per capita in the USA and other gun toting countries than those with restrictions on gun ownership like Canada. i would be very concerned walking the street knowing many are carrying a concealed weapon. No thanks... like I said i don't believe in guns. They are instruments of destruction. Period. They are not needed. sorry guys. My thoughts. Now i will go back to sleep.

 

:no :no

 

Based on past gun buybacks, NONE of those guns that Chicago took in could probably be fired. That's the repeating scenario at ALL of the buybacks. Folks bring in their absolute garbarge that they couldn't sell for $20 to have the taxpayers buy them for $200+. In fact, I know of several "collectors" that go looking for garbage guns for the explicit purpose building an inventory for profit at the taxpayers expense when the stupidass cops decide to waste our money on propaganda.

 

One more point, if someone is hellbent on killing someone, it's not just a gun that will be the weapon of choice. A baseball bat, a knife or a pipe will do the job just as well. I hate to cliche, but GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. You could confiscate every fucking gun in the country and the murder rate won't change. Criminals will be the only ones left with guns (they will use them too) when our legal rights are stripped by liberal-peacenic dolts.

 

If you want to reduce crime and murder, make it a law that EVERYONE has to carry. That will make 99% of the idiot criminals think long and hard before they commit a crime. It's funny, when you know there's a good chance you'll die during committing a crime, you'll probably give up the idea. Think about it this way - How many times have you heard of some dumbass trying to go into a police station or military base to steal? Obivously, they don't because the odds of dying are so high. Conversely, think about some old lady or whimp walking down the street alone, an easy target, However, if it was manditory to carry a gun, even those types of people would become far less ripe as targets and criminals would think twice (or three times) about robbing them knowing there's a good chance the intended victim will resist or even kill them.

 

 

How many drive-by knifings have you read about in the news recently? Innocent bystanders killed in a knife fight...? A good question that I read recently was "If a child in the school yard is throwing rocks at other kids, does it maker sense to give rocks to all the other kids so they can defend themselves?" Look, I get it that the genie is out of the bottle in the USA in regards to guns - 250,000,000 in circulation last estimate - but when there's talk of gun regulation, it does not mean "blanket ban". Does the average citizen really need an AR-15 assault rifle with a large clip capable of firing shit-loads of rounds per minute?

[Blackbart]

ok i might get this post scratched... but i gotta say this... prolly gonna piss a few off...

 

but there is no reason to own guns in this day and age... if we stopped producing any type of weapon then we would not have all the senseless killings... i know i know... guns don't kill people ... people do... your wrong... people with weapons kill people. I know the USA has this thing entrenched in your constitution. I'm trying not to make this political, but its a fact. people with access to guns kill people. Many people will probably NOT be killed because those guns are now NOT on the street.

 

Most killings are a crime of passion... meaning they acted in a fit of rage... take the gun out of the picture and they have time to calm down... if they have access to a gun, then there is no time to think it through. I'm not trying to be difficult. It's a fact. There are a lot more killings per capita in the USA and other gun toting countries than those with restrictions on gun ownership like Canada. i would be very concerned walking the street knowing many are carrying a concealed weapon. No thanks... like I said i don't believe in guns. They are instruments of destruction. Period. They are not needed. sorry guys. My thoughts. Now i will go back to sleep.

 

:no :no

 

Based on past gun buybacks, NONE of those guns that Chicago took in could probably be fired. That's the repeating scenario at ALL of the buybacks. Folks bring in their absolute garbarge that they couldn't sell for $20 to have the taxpayers buy them for $200+. In fact, I know of several "collectors" that go looking for garbage guns for the explicit purpose building an inventory for profit at the taxpayers expense when the stupidass cops decide to waste our money on propaganda.

 

One more point, if someone is hellbent on killing someone, it's not just a gun that will be the weapon of choice. A baseball bat, a knife or a pipe will do the job just as well. I hate to cliche, but GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. You could confiscate every fucking gun in the country and the murder rate won't change. Criminals will be the only ones left with guns (they will use them too) when our legal rights are stripped by liberal-peacenic dolts.

 

If you want to reduce crime and murder, make it a law that EVERYONE has to carry. That will make 99% of the idiot criminals think long and hard before they commit a crime. It's funny, when you know there's a good chance you'll die during committing a crime, you'll probably give up the idea. Think about it this way - How many times have you heard of some dumbass trying to go into a police station or military base to steal? Obivously, they don't because the odds of dying are so high. Conversely, think about some old lady or whimp walking down the street alone, an easy target, However, if it was manditory to carry a gun, even those types of people would become far less ripe as targets and criminals would think twice (or three times) about robbing them knowing there's a good chance the intended victim will resist or even kill them.

 

 

How many drive-by knifings have you read about in the news recently? Innocent bystanders killed in a knife fight...? A good question that I read recently was "If a child in the school yard is throwing rocks at other kids, does it maker sense to give rocks to all the other kids so they can defend themselves?" Look, I get it that the genie is out of the bottle in the USA in regards to guns - 250,000,000 in circulation last estimate - but when there's talk of gun regulation, it does not mean "blanket ban". Does the average citizen really need an AR-15 assault rifle with a large clip capable of firing shit-loads of rounds per minute?

 

Your question is moot...As long as he/she is a law abiding citizen they have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to own it... :)

[bluesnut]

ok i might get this post scratched... but i gotta say this... prolly gonna piss a few off...

 

but there is no reason to own guns in this day and age... if we stopped producing any type of weapon then we would not have all the senseless killings... i know i know... guns don't kill people ... people do... your wrong... people with weapons kill people. I know the USA has this thing entrenched in your constitution. I'm trying not to make this political, but its a fact. people with access to guns kill people. Many people will probably NOT be killed because those guns are now NOT on the street.

 

Most killings are a crime of passion... meaning they acted in a fit of rage... take the gun out of the picture and they have time to calm down... if they have access to a gun, then there is no time to think it through. I'm not trying to be difficult. It's a fact. There are a lot more killings per capita in the USA and other gun toting countries than those with restrictions on gun ownership like Canada. i would be very concerned walking the street knowing many are carrying a concealed weapon. No thanks... like I said i don't believe in guns. They are instruments of destruction. Period. They are not needed. sorry guys. My thoughts. Now i will go back to sleep.

 

:no :no

 

Based on past gun buybacks, NONE of those guns that Chicago took in could probably be fired. That's the repeating scenario at ALL of the buybacks. Folks bring in their absolute garbarge that they couldn't sell for $20 to have the taxpayers buy them for $200+. In fact, I know of several "collectors" that go looking for garbage guns for the explicit purpose building an inventory for profit at the taxpayers expense when the stupidass cops decide to waste our money on propaganda.

 

One more point, if someone is hellbent on killing someone, it's not just a gun that will be the weapon of choice. A baseball bat, a knife or a pipe will do the job just as well. I hate to cliche, but GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. You could confiscate every fucking gun in the country and the murder rate won't change. Criminals will be the only ones left with guns (they will use them too) when our legal rights are stripped by liberal-peacenic dolts.

 

If you want to reduce crime and murder, make it a law that EVERYONE has to carry. That will make 99% of the idiot criminals think long and hard before they commit a crime. It's funny, when you know there's a good chance you'll die during committing a crime, you'll probably give up the idea. Think about it this way - How many times have you heard of some dumbass trying to go into a police station or military base to steal? Obivously, they don't because the odds of dying are so high. Conversely, think about some old lady or whimp walking down the street alone, an easy target, However, if it was manditory to carry a gun, even those types of people would become far less ripe as targets and criminals would think twice (or three times) about robbing them knowing there's a good chance the intended victim will resist or even kill them.

 

 

How many drive-by knifings have you read about in the news recently? Innocent bystanders killed in a knife fight...? A good question that I read recently was "If a child in the school yard is throwing rocks at other kids, does it maker sense to give rocks to all the other kids so they can defend themselves?" Look, I get it that the genie is out of the bottle in the USA in regards to guns - 250,000,000 in circulation last estimate - but when there's talk of gun regulation, it does not mean "blanket ban". Does the average citizen really need an AR-15 assault rifle with a large clip capable of firing shit-loads of rounds per minute?

 

I agree some are extream but it is our right to carry such guns to protect our famlies and our country What this tard did isn't what the ppl that know the difference between right from wrong. Is fair to the ppl that follow the rules and act responsably have to pay in such high prices for higher education but a criminal gets free education while in prision? Is it a good thing to allow these same criminals with that higher education to hold a position with such high level of pay after getting such an education and the ppl that follow the laws have to barly get by, work them selfs to there death to pay a criminals way? Go look at the statics about this 30% of criminals and thats repeat offenders are in better position in life after getting a higher education in prision and given careers and allowed to repeat and still get away with it and the rest pay for it. I cant go back to school because i cant afford to go but if i break the law i get free higher education and take a job from someone like me that has followed the right path.

The reason most countries wont invade the US is beacuse they are scared we will stand up and fight cause we do carry guns. China has said this a number of times we are our country and the Revolutionary war was our citizens standing up to fight against an invasion of another country

[Astronomer]

ok i might get this post scratched... but i gotta say this... prolly gonna piss a few off...

 

but there is no reason to own guns in this day and age... if we stopped producing any type of weapon then we would not have all the senseless killings... i know i know... guns don't kill people ... people do... your wrong... people with weapons kill people. I know the USA has this thing entrenched in your constitution. I'm trying not to make this political, but its a fact. people with access to guns kill people. Many people will probably NOT be killed because those guns are now NOT on the street.

 

Most killings are a crime of passion... meaning they acted in a fit of rage... take the gun out of the picture and they have time to calm down... if they have access to a gun, then there is no time to think it through. I'm not trying to be difficult. It's a fact. There are a lot more killings per capita in the USA and other gun toting countries than those with restrictions on gun ownership like Canada. i would be very concerned walking the street knowing many are carrying a concealed weapon. No thanks... like I said i don't believe in guns. They are instruments of destruction. Period. They are not needed. sorry guys. My thoughts. Now i will go back to sleep.

 

:no :no

 

Based on past gun buybacks, NONE of those guns that Chicago took in could probably be fired. That's the repeating scenario at ALL of the buybacks. Folks bring in their absolute garbarge that they couldn't sell for $20 to have the taxpayers buy them for $200+. In fact, I know of several "collectors" that go looking for garbage guns for the explicit purpose building an inventory for profit at the taxpayers expense when the stupidass cops decide to waste our money on propaganda.

 

One more point, if someone is hellbent on killing someone, it's not just a gun that will be the weapon of choice. A baseball bat, a knife or a pipe will do the job just as well. I hate to cliche, but GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. You could confiscate every fucking gun in the country and the murder rate won't change. Criminals will be the only ones left with guns (they will use them too) when our legal rights are stripped by liberal-peacenic dolts.

 

If you want to reduce crime and murder, make it a law that EVERYONE has to carry. That will make 99% of the idiot criminals think long and hard before they commit a crime. It's funny, when you know there's a good chance you'll die during committing a crime, you'll probably give up the idea. Think about it this way - How many times have you heard of some dumbass trying to go into a police station or military base to steal? Obivously, they don't because the odds of dying are so high. Conversely, think about some old lady or whimp walking down the street alone, an easy target, However, if it was manditory to carry a gun, even those types of people would become far less ripe as targets and criminals would think twice (or three times) about robbing them knowing there's a good chance the intended victim will resist or even kill them.

 

 

How many drive-by knifings have you read about in the news recently? Innocent bystanders killed in a knife fight...? A good question that I read recently was "If a child in the school yard is throwing rocks at other kids, does it maker sense to give rocks to all the other kids so they can defend themselves?" Look, I get it that the genie is out of the bottle in the USA in regards to guns - 250,000,000 in circulation last estimate - but when there's talk of gun regulation, it does not mean "blanket ban". Does the average citizen really need an AR-15 assault rifle with a large clip capable of firing shit-loads of rounds per minute?

 

Your question is moot...As long as he/she is a law abiding citizen they have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to own it... :)

 

I'm not disputing the right to bear arms, but I don't believe that the 2nd amendment said anything about not allowing reasonable limits to ownership. Should the average person be allowed to easily acquire and own a 7.62mm Dillon Aero M134?

[TheLastColdBeer]

The right to bear arms means just that. If a citizen wants a cache of stinger missiles, so be it. Watering down a right means ALL the rights are weakened. Right to privacy? Gone. Freedom of Speech? History. Freedom to assemble, Freedom of religion, Right to a speedy trial? Down the tubes.

 

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

 

Know your rights. Read the documents and understand what they mean. Our Senators & Representatives are doing a piss-poor job of upholding these rights. Our executive branch is hell-bent on undoing your rights with any means possible. Be concerned about a president who whimsically signs executive orders side-stepping Congress. This isn't a game folks, this is the future eroding before your eyes.

[Pharticus]

 

How many drive-by knifings have you read about in the news recently? Innocent bystanders killed in a knife fight...? A good question that I read recently was "If a child in the school yard is throwing rocks at other kids, does it maker sense to give rocks to all the other kids so they can defend themselves?" Look, I get it that the genie is out of the bottle in the USA in regards to guns - 250,000,000 in circulation last estimate - but when there's talk of gun regulation, it does not mean "blanket ban". Does the average citizen really need an AR-15 assault rifle with a large clip capable of firing shit-loads of rounds per minute?

 

Do a need a tank? It depends on who I'm fighting. I'd like to have a bigger gun than my enemy.

[Astronomer]

How many drive-by knifings have you read about in the news recently? Innocent bystanders killed in a knife fight...? A good question that I read recently was "If a child in the school yard is throwing rocks at other kids, does it maker sense to give rocks to all the other kids so they can defend themselves?" Look, I get it that the genie is out of the bottle in the USA in regards to guns - 250,000,000 in circulation last estimate - but when there's talk of gun regulation, it does not mean "blanket ban". Does the average citizen really need an AR-15 assault rifle with a large clip capable of firing shit-loads of rounds per minute?

 

Do a need a tank? It depends on who I'm fighting. I'd like to have a bigger gun than my enemy.

 

If your opponent has a tank, I'd consider moving to a different neighbourhood...

[Blackbart]

At the time the Constitution was drafted single shot rifles was the state of the art weapon...There were also private citizens that could afford their own cannon...You can bet your ass if the weapons we have today was available then, every able body man would own them... :)

[Astronomer]

At the time the Constitution was drafted single shot rifles was the state of the art weapon...There were also private citizens that could afford their own cannon...You can bet your ass if the weapons we have today was available then, every able body man would own them... :)

 

I'll post here if I hear that my British Commonwealth brothers/sisters intend to invade.

[Bullet]

The manhunt for two bank robbers who escaped from a downtown Chicago prison this week intensified overnight, with police chasing multiple leads as new footage shows the men getting into a taxi minutes after their brazen escape.

Investigators say surveillance cameras captured Joseph "Jose" Banks, 37, and Kenneth Conley, 38, getting into a taxi minutes after their early Tuesday escape. They entered the taxi at the intersection of Michigan Avenue and Congress Street, just blocks away from the jail.

The FBI considers them "armed and dangerous."

 

When i first heard this on the radio, something caught my attention. Look at the last line. Somehow, in Chicago where they have some of the strictest guns laws in our nation, convicted bank robbers could arm themselves on the same day they broke out of jail. So lets pass some more laws making it more difficult for law abiding citizens to arms themselves and maybe next time these crooks wont be able to get theirs.

[Blackbart]

At the time the Constitution was drafted single shot rifles was the state of the art weapon...There were also private citizens that could afford their own cannon...You can bet your ass if the weapons we have today was available then, every able body man would own them... :)

 

I'll post here if I hear that my British Commonwealth brothers/sisters intend to invade.

No one here is concerned about an invasion from another country but being robbed and killed by the crack head a few streets over is a real concern...Your answer just shows how little you really understand this country... :)

[Astronomer]

I recall a trained policewoman on a talk show recently describing confronting a gunman in a hallway. Despite her firearms training, close range, and the confined area, only one of her 5 shots hit the gunman. Recall the Empire State Building incident in August where two trained police officers hit the gunman 7 times, but 9 bystanders were injured by police bullets and fragments from ricochets (http://online.wsj.co...3836585324.html). In a situation, adrenaline is PUMPING. Hard. Highly-trained police officers cannot avoid the stress reaction and their accuracy is impaired. Given that, you want me to trust a civilian with high-power big-clip weaponry i.e. AR-15? Most folks would like to believe that they'd be Dirty Harry in a situation; cool, calm, and icily focused. Good luck with that. Guns should be sold with a free pack of Depends™.

Edited December 22, 2012 by Astronomer

[Astronomer]

At the time the Constitution was drafted single shot rifles was the state of the art weapon...There were also private citizens that could afford their own cannon...You can bet your ass if the weapons we have today was available then, every able body man would own them... :)

 

I'll post here if I hear that my British Commonwealth brothers/sisters intend to invade.

No one here is concerned about an invasion from another country but being robbed and killed by the crack head a few streets over is a real concern...Your answer just shows how little you really understand this country... :)

 

Your answer shows how little you understand humour. No offence.

 

If Crack and crackheads are the problem, why not tackle - seriously, and with real intent - the issues that cause crack and crime to be common. If crackheads are an issue in your neighbourhood, move. And please don't patronize me. Scratch that. As per Little-Old-Man, I'm expected to have a thicker skin, damned progressive, liberal, leftie, commie, puppie-eating, atheist that I are be

Edited December 22, 2012 by Astronomer

[Damage_inc-]

It's funny how similar this shooting is to the batman shooting. Even more interesting is both Adams father and James Holes father both had detailed info to bring down the Libor scandal. What I came across, Its not political it is criminal.

 

The father of Adam Lanza is Peter Lanza, a VP and Tax Director at GE Financial, one of the many corporations owned and controlled by the international central banks, and was a partner at Ernst & Young. ¹ The father of James Holmes is Robert Holmes, and, at the time of the shooting, the lead fraud scientist for the credit score company FICO.

 

Jame's father wrote the algorithms to the programs that track money for bank frauds and identity theft. This guy made the credit score possible. Hey discovers the way the big banks loaned each other money was HUGE fraud. It is known as THE LIBOR SCANDEL. These banks were influencing and funding wars. Any of this can be googled. There is an agenda here.

 

 

¹ http://abcnews.go.co...73#.UM-kh3fheSp

² http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021025002

³ http://www.nowpublic...wsuit-announced

4 http://actionamerica...uns/guns1.shtml

5 www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.500915613270502.129574.296076410421091&type=3

 

Supporting video evidence:

 

 

 

 

roll up another brother

[BANNPIRE]

YEP Heaven forbid someone do research on anything, then produce their findings. That makes them crazy or on drugs. So what do you call the mdia? If im crazy or stoned then they are full out insane.

Edited December 22, 2012 by BANNPIRE

[Blackbart]

I recall a trained policewoman on a talk show recently describing confronting a gunman in a hallway. Despite her firearms training, close range, and the confined area, only one of her 5 shots hit the gunman. Recall the Empire State Building incident in August where two trained police officers hit the gunman 7 times, but 9 bystanders were injured by police bullets and fragments from ricochets (http://online.wsj.co...3836585324.html). In a situation, adrenaline is PUMPING. Hard. Highly-trained police officers cannot avoid the stress reaction and their accuracy is impaired. Given that, you want me to trust a civilian with high-power big-clip weaponry i.e. AR-15? Most folks would like to believe that they'd be Dirty Harry in a situation; cool, calm, and icily focused. Good luck with that. Guns should be sold with a free pack of Depends™.

No I don't want you to trust an armed civilian...You live in Canada...You are expected to just stand there and not defend yourself or try to out run the bullets your assailant sends your way...Myself on the other hand will defend myself and those around me and terminate the threat... :)

[Blackbart]

At the time the Constitution was drafted single shot rifles was the state of the art weapon...There were also private citizens that could afford their own cannon...You can bet your ass if the weapons we have today was available then, every able body man would own them... :)

 

I'll post here if I hear that my British Commonwealth brothers/sisters intend to invade.

No one here is concerned about an invasion from another country but being robbed and killed by the crack head a few streets over is a real concern...Your answer just shows how little you really understand this country... :)

 

Your answer shows how little you understand humour. No offence.

 

If Crack and crackheads are the problem, why not tackle - seriously, and with real intent - the issues that cause crack and crime to be common. If crackheads are an issue in your neighbourhood, move. And please don't patronize me. Scratch that. As per Little-Old-Man, I'm expected to have a thicker skin, damned progressive, liberal, leftie, commie, puppie-eating, atheist that I are be

 

That was just one example of the sick, depraved, and general lowlifes that think they can do what they want, take what they want, and impose their will upon others without consequence...I have never been anyone's bitch and I never will be...I only take what is rightfully mine and never put my hands on another person in aggression nor will I allow anyone to put there hands on me or mine in aggression... :)

[Astronomer]

I recall a trained policewoman on a talk show recently describing confronting a gunman in a hallway. Despite her firearms training, close range, and the confined area, only one of her 5 shots hit the gunman. Recall the Empire State Building incident in August where two trained police officers hit the gunman 7 times, but 9 bystanders were injured by police bullets and fragments from ricochets (http://online.wsj.co...3836585324.html). In a situation, adrenaline is PUMPING. Hard. Highly-trained police officers cannot avoid the stress reaction and their accuracy is impaired. Given that, you want me to trust a civilian with high-power big-clip weaponry i.e. AR-15? Most folks would like to believe that they'd be Dirty Harry in a situation; cool, calm, and icily focused. Good luck with that. Guns should be sold with a free pack of Depends™.

No I don't want you to trust an armed civilian...You live in Canada...You are expected to just stand there and not defend yourself or try to out run the bullets your assailant sends your way...Myself on the other hand will defend myself and those around me and terminate the threat... :)

 

No problem. Just try and avoid collateral damage i.e. killing or maiming other people. I agree we're in a different situation up here. Tighter controls on guns and far fewer gun deaths per capita. Different situations, different cultures altogether. I did state that the genie is out of the bottle down there, and your situation is unique, and much like Afghanistan or Mexico for comparison.

 

I heard an interview this evening on the CBC radio news magazine "As It Happens" with a photo-journalist who's covered wars, crime scenes, and the Hell that Mexico has become. He's seen and documented the aftermath of hundreds of gun murders, seen many lives extinguished first-hand, and spoken with many of those on the business-end of the deaths - both good and bad guys. His perspective is riveting, his observations insightful, and I'm glad that I live where I do, and I worry for my family living in the USA.

 

Stay safe and all the best to you and your family over the holidays.

Edited December 22, 2012 by Astronomer

[Yop]

So the solution for american is to wear a gun against gun?

[ChknFngr]

Yop tu vas t'attirer les foudres

[Super Max]

Okay so this is simply political bullshit.

This also heard not belong on the forum.

But this is fixed differently interpreted lol

 

 

For someone quick to kill, I have no gun or wapem needed so wapens superfluous they call only violence on

Edited December 22, 2012 by Hans

[Bullet]

i think we need to ban desert eagles.

 

 

 

Edited December 22, 2012 by Bullet

[Bullet]

Yop tu vas t'attirer les foudres

 

YOP

Edited December 22, 2012 by Bullet

[deerejon]

Its 4 mins and change but the last line from the girl says it all... Edited December 22, 2012 by deerejon

[Bogleg]

This topic belongs in the politlcal forum, not here. If the topic of conversation is whether or not GOVERNMENTS should buy back guns, or whether or not GOVERNMENTS should regulate firearms or not, then that is clearly as POLITICAL topic.

 

And since we have a multi-national community with many different backgrounds whose governments have a wide array of policies regarding guns, this is an inappropriate topic for our GAMING COMMUNITY.