• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

When guns become a fetish.

morthrane said:
Not really, but I do think the spirit of a law is as important as the letter. The bottom line here is that "reasonable", while admirable, ends up being a tool to limit and remove Rights. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, and all that.

Not can or even should. Arms did include military weapons like cannon, hence my point. The importation ban and later attempt at confiscation of small and large arms was a major factor in the Colonial rebellion; in some opinions, that was the fire that lit the fuse.

Nothing much has changed, despite what others would maintain. People are still fucking people, politics and corruption are natural bedfellows, etc. Medical technology has gotten better, weapons more refined, but the philosophy hasn't really changed at all.

Straw man BS: shouting fire in a theater isn't expressing a political viewpoint.
Click to expand...

No need to get mad ("straw man BS"). Here is the 1st Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It doesn't say that only political speech is protected. I get your point, spirit of the law as important (to me, it is MORE important) than the letter. But, that is also the "pro-gun control" perspective! They are saying that despite the letter of the 2nd Amendment, we shouldn't allow people to have cannons, tanks, fully automatic weapons, etc. So, you are having cake and eating it.

As for technology/societal change, what would the founders have said about domain name squatters, patent trolls, etc.? Do you see anything in the text about solitary confinement, and whether it is cruel/unusual punishment (as an example)?

Is your view that the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to carry whatever weapons, I mean "arms," that come to mind?
 
Of my Militia had nukes that would really helpe protect my rights from a Tyrannical government.


Don't infringe on my right to bear nuclear arms
 
Of my Militia had nukes that would really helpe protect my rights from a Tyrannical government.


Don't infringe on my right to bear nuclear arms
 
Well if that logic pans out im very likely to take a life i own probabaly right around 20 rifles pistols and shotguns at this point. I have never shot anyone and never wanted to but then ive witnessed more than my share of gunshot deaths. its a nasty way to go. I have had to deploy my weapon once when two individuals pulled on me while working. Im a firm believer if i didnt have my pistol i would have been killed. So honestly i dispute the idea that gun owners are prone to criminal activity. Criminals are Criminals if they dont have gun they will find something else to use. but the majority of gun owners are law abiding citizens but my feeling is things ar egoing to get a lot worse before the get better and the more law abiding gun
owners and CCW holders we have in our midst the safer everyone will be. I know everyone probabably knows someone who shouldnt own a gun for whatever reason but thats no excuse to take away law abiding citizens only real effective form of self defense. these cases need to be handled on an individual basis. If you dont like guns dont own one but dont infringe on the rights of your fellow Americans to protect themselves and thier families.
 
NorCalAthlete said:
It's not about needs. Are you aware that a minigun is perfectly legal to own even in CA? They're several hundred thousand dollars and you'll spend thousands in ammo every time you shoot it, but they're legal. Most citizens simply can't afford the cost of the higher end military hardware - coincidentally one reason I think corporations should never be considered citizens but that's a separate discussion. Main point is the second amendment says "arms". Not "keep and bear small arms" but just "arms". Arms is a term that CAN include everything from rifles to artillery to whatever goes boom or bang.

The second amendment specifically says shall not be infringed. By its very definition, ANY limit is infringement.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that CA didn't allow machine guns, do they?
 
Junkie said:
I was under the impression that CA didn't allow machine guns, do they?
Click to expand...

Rare and difficult to get but yes.

In regards to the minigun:

http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulings/rulings/atf-rulings/atf-ruling-2004-5.html
Held, the 7.62mm Minigun is designed to shoot automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. Consequently, the 7.62mm Minigun is a machinegun as defined in section 5845(b) of the National Firearms Act. See United States v. Fleischli, 305 F.3d at 655-56. Similarly, the housing that surrounds the rotor is the frame or receiver of the Minigun, and thus is also a machinegun. Id.; see 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23); 27 CFR 478.11, 479.11.
Click to expand...

http://www.omg-facts.com/Business/It-s-Legal-To-Own-A-Minigun-In-The-US/52406
While theoretically you could run out and buy one, there are some problems:

First, there are only around a dozen miniguns available for civilian purchasing in the US, and only appear on the market occasionally.
Second, and probably most obvious, is price. Whenever a minigun goes up on the market, it usually sells for around $400,000
Third is the mounting system you have to buy separately. Despite what some hardcore action movies would have you believe, firing one of these by hand without any mounting would lead to major injury from the recoil.
Fourth is the added cost of bullets. It’s about sixty dollars to fire the minigun for one second.
Click to expand...

In regards to owning a machine gun in CA:
http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-laws/california.aspx
A machine gun is defined as any firearm, which shoots, or is designed to shoot, automatically, more than one shot, without manual reloading, by single function of the trigger. The term also includes any conversion part, frame or receiver of a machine gun, or any firearm deemed as such by the federal government. Upon a showing of good cause, a permit for possession and/or transportation may be issued by the Department of Justice. It has been reported that the Department of Justice refuses to grant such permits.
Click to expand...

Due to the "good cause" part, it's extremely difficult to get a machine gun in CA...but not illegal and not 100% impossible.
 
Last edited:
The DOJ NFA permits are actually pretty easy to get.

Start a movie production/prop company.
 
Antarius said:
Whenever I hear the argument about guns start with "Look, im not anti-gun", "I own guns..." "I'm just saying...." it reminds me of a KKK member or confederate saying "Look, I have black friends, I'm not anti black, I'm just saying...."

In short: I don't believe the argument.
Click to expand...



:rofl

I was about to type the same thing but you saved me the trouble.

It's Climber, notice how he disappears from the conversation by the 2nd page. He's like that ninja farter that queefs into your cubicle and then flees the scene of the crime.




And is Daks actually a real person?

Edit: Never mind, I just read the rest of the thread. I guess she's real.
 
Last edited:
ScorpioVI said:
:rofl

I was about to type the same thing but you saved me the trouble.

It's Climber, notice how he disappears from the conversation by the 2nd page. He's like that ninja farter that queefs into your cubicle and then flees the scene of the crime.




And is Daks actually a real person?

Edit: Never mind, I just read the rest of the thread. I guess she's real.
Click to expand...
I just get tired of the cheap shots and willful ignorance. I said my piece and tried to clarify what I meant, but there are too many folks in here who take a scorched earth approach to guns and rights.

An example of that was Antarius post that you quoted. Comparing me to KKK, yes it was intentionally offensive, is the type of shit that happens in here that has gotten old years ago.

So, there is no point in continuing to participate in a thread if all that's going to happen is that you're going to take a ton of abuse for daring to say anything about somebody's sacred subject.
 
carries an axe said:
I would love to, there ways to do just about anything:partyhttp://www.adaptiveoutdoorsman.com/lmpm.html
this guys got the right idea
[YouTube]h9ysRxaWXDo&sns[/YouTube]
Click to expand...

Nemo Brinker said:
Holy cow, that stuff is badass! How can we get you hooked up with some of their gear?
Click to expand...



Let's make this happen for him. I can provide a private indoor range session, or even have the 200 yard range at Metcalf reserved for ourselves for a couple of hours.
 
Well, he said that he's a gun owner. It's safe to assume that he may have more then one firearm. Which according to him makes it a fetish. So any day now climber is bound to go on shooting rampage.
 
Climber said:
I just get tired of the cheap shots and willful ignorance. I said my piece and tried to clarify what I meant, but there are too many folks in here who take a scorched earth approach to guns and rights.

An example of that was Antarius post that you quoted. Comparing me to KKK, yes it was intentionally offensive, is the type of shit that happens in here that has gotten old years ago.

So, there is no point in continuing to participate in a thread if all that's going to happen is that you're going to take a ton of abuse for daring to say anything about somebody's sacred subject.
Click to expand...

Hey POT remember that when you jump into my shit OK :thumbup
 
You guys keep ridiculing him, but he's got a good point. For as many people scream, "Its my RIGHT", and all the bullshit becoming a socialist country, but for everyone that spreads all the hysteria crap, there are probably thousands, of gun owners that aren't as rabid, that feel that they don't want to associate with goobers at Starbucks making a statement, or as I read in here in a previous post, the guys swearing that, if you aren't with us, you are against us.
Many people don't want to have anything to do with any radical fringe, which is what this is turning into.

You guys keep blowing up a smokescreen about the fetish guy that went on a rampage, but you're picking shit apart and missing the big picture.
 
The big picture has as much to do with fringe elements as the 1st Amendment has to do with the Westboro Baptist Church.

The ones focusing on the fringe elements and going "see, look at this bullshit WE NEED MORE REASONABLE AND COMMON SENSE RESTRICTIONS" are the ones missing the big picture. Can you imagine how people would react if every Westboro protest was blown up all over the media as reason to restrict the right to assemble, right to free speech, etc?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top