Shooting at a Florida high school
- Thread starter Mr Deeds
- Start date
I see what you did there!
I would say 'clever'... but you clearly can't read, so I don't want to give you false praise.
Why would you need a steel baton under your bed? Were you afraid that someone would want to break into your house and cause you harm?
Why would any intruder want to cause you harm?
The screen is cellphone on a picatinny rail mount. You can use it to film as you shoot.
You can get versions that hold a camera or phone to look through your scope for bench shooting - if you were experimenting with different types of ammunition or wanted to check your scope adjustments for different distances. With a scope mount - if you use slow motion video - you can actually follow the bullet along it's path to the target and see ballistics in action.
Some hunters use side rail mounts to film their hunts with a phone or GoPro. Some people use a baliistics calculator app on their phone too - so this is also handy at a range if you are doing long distance shots.
He's referring to the US 2nd amendment which states the right to own guns to protect the country from "A well regulated Militia".
I guess he doesnt realize you're Canadian and that doesnt apply to you
I look at gunners as being a nation unto themselves. As such, borders do not apply.
Another idiotic statement. Starting to sound like delusions and paranoia. Certainly misinformed and mired in stereotypes. Gun owners born on the gun tree, perhaps?
Another one of these little psychos running around:
http://kutv.com/news/local/juvenile...ng-us-flag-with-isis-flag-at-hurricane-school
http://kutv.com/news/local/juvenile...ng-us-flag-with-isis-flag-at-hurricane-school
Oh, the all powerful "they". Are you one of the people who think gun registration and comprehensive background checks are really just part of the government plot to steal guns?
And the US already has restrictions on many classes of dangerous weapons where the risk outweighs the public interest in having them. Usually these plans allow grandfathering of already owned guns if restrictions are changed. It is just my opinion but other than someone being air-dropped into a pack of hungry polar bears there is no public interest in semi-automatic rifles with extended magazines (but maybe that's just me being Canadian and viewing guns as a tool rather than a basic right).
You're mixing Canadian and US gun politics again, and changing the subject, putting words into my mouth.
My response was to your statement:
"Haven't seen too many people here saying Canada should ban more guns. Most of us are pretty content with the balance our laws strike."
"they" are the Coalition for Gun Control, headed by Wendy Cukier. They got funded by the Federal Government in the '90's in order to lobby.... the Federal Government.
"they" are PolySeSouvient or PolyRemembers, who keep on harping about banning guns because they are very scary, even though they and the CCGC got what they wanted in the 1995 Firerams Act. Last year, they managed to get the Quebec Government to start their own gun registry at a cost of tens of millions of dollars, and to no benefit, when the Quebec health care system is cash strapped (I can give you many dismal examples; Ontario's looks like nirvana in comparison); the same money would permit better access to their dismal mental health sytem, better diagnostic imagery and better resources for battered women. No lives are going to be saved by this illusion; but many lives could be saved by placing that cash to deal with those patients on endless waiting lists. One of their leaders, Natalie Provost, was appointed vice-chair of the Federal Government's Firearms Advisory Committee.
So ya, they have a lot of influence despite their relative small size.
You should also be clear on what country you are referring to, and not switch back and forth when it suits you to misrepresent one's position.
It IS you being Canadian. Nothing wrong with that, but just recognize that one of the biggest differences between Canada and the US is gun culture. So for many Americans - owning a semi-automatic is not only a right, it’s a celebration of this right, so not about need and more about because they can. For “need” - add to this the growing number who view the Govt as the enemy and believe in the 2nd Amendment’s provisions to arm themselves against this enemy. So registration of weapons is seen as a first step towards organized confiscation. As a Canadian, you should understand this mentality - it’s what the previous Govt used as an excuse to kill our gun registry. So imagine the resistance in the US.
Licensing could fly (as in requiring a license to acquire a weapon) but registration would be a very hard sell.
I am actually quite placid. I think the congregation gets angry when their faith in Tr-mp is challenged.
Actually I was asking a question. And the "here" I was referring to was more specific being the posters in this thread.
At the risk of being yelled at mixing politics, does that small group for gun control in Canada have more influence that the small NRA does in the states?
And that is a completely irrational view. The vast majority of people in the US accept limits on heavy weaponry already so they are unable to effectively resist a tyrannical government already. Also, if limits are already accepted, the only discussion is where to set the limits.
Without looking at polls, I would also expect that the people with the view you describe represent a pretty small segment of American gun owners let alone the population in general.
As I understood it, the complaints from the general public were about the cost of the program and its inefficiency.
No, you misunderstood the Canadian Gun Registry. Cost was an excuse - the real problem was the fear that that the registry would lead to confiscation of weapons or even arrests of lawful gun owners (eg: if a stolen gun were used in a crime). The NRA was involved in the organization of lobbying and protests against the Canadian registry. Also - the costs of registration were driven higher by typical Govt incompetence but also active protest during the registration process itself. Examples are: waiting until just before deadline to submit registration info, deliberate errors in registrations submitted, etc. But the CPC made hay over the Gun Registry "Boondoggle" cost over-runs so that's ultimately what was used as an excuse to kill it (but the real reason was paranoia about its use). Of course, the irony later was the CPC's complete botching of the Shared Services implementation (which includes the Phoenix pay system). So apparently, IT implementations in Govt are hard for any govt to do well.
As for your points about irrationality re: the 2nd Amendment - Heavy armament is not banned in the States it's controlled. If a citizen wanted to buy a surplus tank - they could. Same with cannons and bazookas. There are provisions for what are classed as "Title II" weapons and devices. So eg: So called "destructive devices" could be legal in some States - but you would need to go through extra hurdles in order to acquire. So it's not such an irrational view to want to maintain the right to own semi-automatics. Again - your view that it is irrational may be due to your Canadian perspective.
