RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Kirata -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/30/2015 7:37:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Most pro and anti gun sites I take with a grain of salt... but THIS one I believe is on the up and up... just check out some of the statistics... crime may be going down but the carnage is increasing.

Using Brady as your go-to choice for accurate information about guns is like using Stormfront as a reference for accurate information about Jews.

K.




ifmaz -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/30/2015 7:42:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

But they do find stolen guns every day... and when they do they should know the circumstances and the owner... and when appropriate assign culpability to the owner whose reasonably unsecured weapon was stolen and used in a crime or accident to a child.

As far as the unsecured guns stolen I know this... whoever has them has committed at least ONE crime... and it is reasonable to assume they will commit more...and it is reasonable to assume sometime in the future one of these guns will be recovered in a crime.

Butch


I do not believe you have read the entirety of what was posted. Law enforcement can already, via the ATF and NTC, determine the last "registered" owner per ATF-4473 forms. However, you have provided a disincentive for legitimate firearm owners to report theft similar to how many rape victims do not report rapes because they fear they will be blamed.

You seem preoccupied with determining blame rather than discussing a meaningful solution to a problem.



kdsub -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/30/2015 7:45:02 PM)

I don't think so at all... but there is no use trying to change your mind or others opposed to new gun legislation... I understand that... I just hope someone not sure of their position will read your posts and mine and perhaps make an educated choice.

Otherwise you are not posting to convince me and I am not posting to convince you... our thoughts are set and it is up to others to decide who makes the most sense.

Butch



kdsub -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/30/2015 7:48:28 PM)

If they don't report the theft then that is crime enough when the owner is found... and many guns change hands without registration in private sales. Perhaps if a gun owner knows he may be liable for his carelessness... he will not be so careless.

Butch



ifmaz -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/30/2015 7:56:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

If they don't report the theft then that is crime enough... and many guns change hands without registration in private sales. Perhaps if a gun owner knows he may be liable for his carelessness... he will not be so careless.

Butch


Failure to report a crime is not itself a crime (with certain exceptions, mostly as they relate to the abuse of a minor). That would set a very dangerous precedent.



BamaD -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/30/2015 7:58:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

If they don't report the theft then that is crime enough when the owner is found... and many guns change hands without registration in private sales. Perhaps if a gun owner knows he may be liable for his carelessness... he will not be so careless.

Butch

If you base things on what you get from the Brady Bunch that explains a lot.



kdsub -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/30/2015 8:23:24 PM)

lol... I cannot imagine why you would say that... you are so predictable.

Butch



BamaD -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/30/2015 8:35:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

lol... I cannot imagine why you would say that... you are so predictable.

Butch

Their opinion on guns is as valid as the Klans on blacks......Jews......Catholics....ok just about everyone but them.
As I have said before, I don't think your exageration of the problems is because you are dishonest, but because you put your faith in dishonest sources.
This is a perfect example.



CreativeDominant -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/30/2015 10:04:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

lol... I cannot imagine why you would say that... you are so predictable.

Butch
Still waiting for an answer to my question, butch...



thompsonx -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/3/2015 6:23:29 AM)


ORIGINAL: Kirata

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: Kirata

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Not having a manual safety does not automatically equate to an increased risk of accidental discharge. They still won't fire unless you pull the trigger. And in the context of your comment about the additional time required to release a safety, I can tell you that there isn't any with the manual safety on a 1911. It's just a thumb-flick as your hand wraps around the grip.

Maybe it is like that in the movies but that is not how a 1911 works.[8|]

My bad, I wasn't clear. I meant here on Earth.

Here on earth the 1911 is a single action. That means that the slide must be put into battery to cock the hammer and a cartridge stripped from the magazine and fed into the chamber. None of that occures with just a thumb flick and gripping the weapon.

The 1911 is designed for safe carry in "Condition 1" (cocked and locked).

The 1911 was never designed to be carried in condition one since when it was originally desgned it did not have a thumb safey. Which branch of the u.s. military authorizes it's members to carry the 1911 in condition one?



Kirata -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/3/2015 1:07:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

The 1911 was never designed to be carried in condition one since when it was originally desgned it did not have a thumb safey. Which branch of the u.s. military authorizes it's members to carry the 1911 in condition one?

Colt's earliest pistol of similar form, the M1900, based on Browning's earlier prototypes, had a sight-safety (look it up). But there were problems with the design and Colt abandoned the sight-safety, which generated complaints from the military, because the pistol had to be usable by cavalry. Safe carry of the pistol required an empty chamber, and having to rack the slide while riding a horse was a no-go. The eventual result was the M1911, a hands-on design by John Browning, with a thumb safety and a grip safety.

K.



PeonForHer -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/3/2015 6:23:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

The 1911 was never designed to be carried in condition one since when it was originally desgned it did not have a thumb safey. Which branch of the u.s. military authorizes it's members to carry the 1911 in condition one?

Colt's earliest pistol of similar form, the M1900, based on Browning's earlier prototypes, had a sight-safety (look it up). But there were problems with the design and Colt abandoned the sight-safety, which generated complaints from the military, because the pistol had to be usable by cavalry. Safe carry of the pistol required an empty chamber, and having to rack the slide while riding a horse was a no-go. The eventual result was the M1911, a hands-on design by John Browning, with a thumb safety and a grip safety.

K.



The Mk 2 version also had a German-fluted barrel, which, moreover, was flugelhorn-chamfered. An uncredited engineer added those modifications - I've always felt that Browning's additions were actually unimportant by comparison.



Kirata -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/3/2015 6:28:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

The Mk 2 version also had a German-fluted barrel, which, moreover, was flugelhorn-chamfered. An uncredited engineer added those modifications...

Doubtless he was British.

K.



PeonForHer -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/3/2015 6:33:00 PM)

Doubtless.



Dvr22999874 -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/3/2015 8:32:23 PM)

I believe that was the invention of a Major Dennis Bloodnock, (late of the Standback Fusileers), of Railway Cuttings, East Cheam



PeonForHer -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/4/2015 5:12:07 PM)

Few understand the importance of East Cheam to the defence and preservation of the Free World, DV. Thank you for your timely reminder there.



BamaD -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/4/2015 5:24:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

If they don't report the theft then that is crime enough... and many guns change hands without registration in private sales. Perhaps if a gun owner knows he may be liable for his carelessness... he will not be so careless.

Butch


Failure to report a crime is not itself a crime (with certain exceptions, mostly as they relate to the abuse of a minor). That would set a very dangerous precedent.


And it varies from state to state.



kdsub -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/4/2015 5:45:15 PM)

Bama I was talking about a proposed law... not an existing one. He was questioning me about what if a gun owner did not report a gun theft... I said it could be part of the new law that it would be a crime not to report a registered gun theft. Then if an unreported stolen gun was used in a crime a penalty could be assessed to the owner who did not report it.


You may not like such a law but it would be well within the Constitution and it would not cross the 2nd amendment in any way.

Butch



BamaD -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/4/2015 6:28:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Bama I was talking about a proposed law... not an existing one. He was questioning me about what if a gun owner did not report a gun theft... I said it could be part of the new law that it would be a crime not to report a registered gun theft. Then if an unreported stolen gun was used in a crime a penalty could be assessed to the owner who did not report it.


You may not like such a law but it would be well within the Constitution and it would not cross the 2nd amendment in any way.

Butch

I personally do not see any reason not to report a stolen gun.
Your law would result in numerous reports of gun being stolen that were not.
The only thing that would suppress reporting would be if you declared that "improper" storage made you an acomplice in any crime committited with your firearm telling people they might as well take their chances cause they go to jail either way.
BTW I was responding to him, not to you.



thompsonx -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (11/5/2015 5:25:26 AM)

ORIGINAL: Kirata

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

The 1911 was never designed to be carried in condition one since when it was originally desgned it did not have a thumb safey. Which branch of the u.s. military authorizes it's members to carry the 1911 in condition one?
[/quote]
Colt's earliest pistol of similar form, the M1900, based on Browning's earlier prototypes, had a sight-safety (look it up).

Please try to focus. I said nothing about a sight safety which was never on the 1911. We are discussing your opinions of how a 1911 works and what the rules are for it's carry.

But there were problems with the design and Colt abandoned the sight-safety, which generated complaints from the military, because the pistol had to be usable by cavalry. Safe carry of the pistol required an empty chamber, and having to rack the slide while riding a horse was a no-go

That would be true for the terminally clumsy. Riding a horse and putting a 1911 into battery at the same time is not a difficult chore.

The eventual result was the M1911, a hands-on design by John Browning, with a thumb safety and a grip safety.

Which branch of the u.s. military authorizes it's members to carry the 1911 in condition one?



Page: <<   < prev  16 17 18 [19] 20   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875