Customer Discussions > Video Games forum

OT: What does Obama's second term mean for gun owners?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 126-150 of 334 posts in this discussion
Posted on Nov 8, 2012 9:32:41 AM PST
Will there be a new assault rifle ban? Most likely.

Will there be laws passed forcing people to give up their currently owned guns. No.

At any rate, I think a government that is one of the most prolific weapons dealers on the planet telling its own people what they can't have is rather hypocritical.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 9:35:14 AM PST
One of my pet peeves. Heh.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 9:36:31 AM PST
Agreed.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 9:47:23 AM PST
Bobbum Man says:
The 2nd Amendment is outdated. The right to bear arms was relevant back in colonial times, but seeing as how normal citizens today don't belong to a militia fighting lobsterbacks because they wanted representation in Parliament it's not necessary.

Don't get me wrong, I love guns. I just don't agree that everyone should be able to own one.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 9:49:22 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 8, 2012 9:50:32 AM PST
MrFoxhound says:
Most of these mass murderers are not using assault rifles. They're using handguns, rifles, shotguns and submachine guns. The only incident I remember that involved an assault rifle was when that nut job fired the AK at the White House.

That said, I have no idea why anyone would need to own an assault rifle.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 9:52:15 AM PST
Wasn't that AK a semi-automatic rifle?

The ones used by those armor toting bank robbers were full auto though. That's the only semi-recent incident I can think of.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 9:55:15 AM PST
FOGE says:
The Colorado movie theatre dude had an AR-15

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 9:55:42 AM PST
FOGE says:
A terrorist like Simon would want the citizens to be less armed than the criminals.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 9:55:43 AM PST
So, in terms of U.S. citizens, who shouldn't be able to own them?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 9:57:36 AM PST
Both the historical and the textual interpretations of the Constitution point to common citizens NOT being able to own guns.

This is one reason I don't view that document as holy writ.

Posted on Nov 8, 2012 9:58:51 AM PST
Frankenzubaz says:
Gun Nut. (noun) - a bullet.

Used in a sentence: You got gun nut on your face; oh wait, you can't hear me, because you're dead!

Posted on Nov 8, 2012 9:59:10 AM PST
I did not read the who thread so I don't know if this was clarified. the issue isn't that Obama is going to "take our guns" the issue is that he is going to decide which guns we can own based on what it looks like. the only difference between a hunting rifle and a so called "assault rifle" is the way it looks. it doesn't magically have more power.

Clinton enacted the first "assault weapon" ban in the early "90's and in 1994 a whole lot of Democrats lost their jobs over it. in fact they didn't take back the senate until 2004.

I think based on the climate of today's politics he could still put in an AWB and it still might pass, but again maybe not. Obama might be a lame duck, but he still has to answer to his party, many of whom still want to get reelected.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:00:22 AM PST
Xavier 7 says:
"militia fighting lobsterbacks"

Hmm, isn't it lobsterback fighting militiamen?

I don't see too much of a problem with having guns. Is there any reason why civilians should have an assault weapon or sub-machine gun? Nah. I also think there should be more regulation involved. The right to bear arms is not only a right but instilled in the fabric of the country. Either way, guns are going to get out there...ban or not. i.e. Mexico.

However, the coolest way to institute better control would be a biometric scanners installed in the grip of the weapon. Ala Judge Dredd. That'd be pretty cool.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:01:05 AM PST
Bobbum Man says:
I would say people who can't pass a basic IQ test. Enough dummies accidentally shoot others or themselves as is.

And no one needs to own an assault rifle.

I would also ban the hunting of defenseless animals. Gator and other predatory animals are fair game though.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:01:25 AM PST
MrFoxhound says:
A black market would pop up where they would sell ID neutral guns ala MGS4.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:02:02 AM PST
Xavier 7 says:
Conversion kits are sold for AK and AR-15 based semi-automatic weapons to turn them in to fully automatic weapons.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:02:25 AM PST
That's still a semi-automatic rifle.

Assault rifle = fully automatic or select (burst) fire.

Semi-automatic rifle =/= assault rifle

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:03:11 AM PST
Xavier 7 says:
Ha, they have a huge weapon pool to pull from dating back to the early Chinese....

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:04:04 AM PST
Yes, but it is still illegal to own one. Unless you do it yourself, you can't purchase a fully automatic lower for a rifle.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:04:51 AM PST
"the only difference between a hunting rifle and a so called "assault rifle" is the way it looks."

No, this is where the misunderstanding takes place. An assault rifle is either fully automatic or has select (burst) fire.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:05:15 AM PST
Xavier 7 says:
Regardless of the speed of repetition in which the bullets come out of the rifle. The part that worries me are the types of rounds being thrown down range.

.223 ammo (AR-15 and AKs) pierce soft body armor. Typical LE issued armor. You need to be wearing hard ceramic plate armor to block that stuff.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:06:36 AM PST
Xavier 7 says:
I'm not talking about the legality of owning one, I'm merely stating that procuring a home-made fully automatic weapon is pretty easy.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:07:34 AM PST
FOGE says:
Agreed on the IQ.

No one needs to own a H2 but it doesnt mean people shouldnt be able to own them.

What about deer? Are they defenseless? The idea of hunting deer is to thin the herd so they dont starve to death and run into my car.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:07:46 AM PST
No, it is not about "how it looks". It is about any semi-auto rifle with a pistol, detachable magazine, telescopic/folding stock, bayonet, threaded barrel or a flash suppressor.

Also, this distinction was clarified earlier.

The biggest issue that will be looked at in the event this is put up for legislation is the damage it would do to the firearms industry, what manufacturers and distributors would be able to do with the remaining inventory of firearms they would no longer be able to sell to average citizens (a vast majority of their consumer base), and what impact this would have on the economy. They would be putting some companies out of business, as well as eliminating jobs.

There is far more to it than simply wanting the ban in place.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:08:18 AM PST
Agrreed for the most part, I wasn't a big fan of Survivor.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Video Games forum
Participants:  40
Total posts:  334
Initial post:  Nov 8, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 9, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions