So is that a yes on the bet? I think I should clearly state my views on the subject. 1) I am against semi-auto guns being banned, period. This is my line. 2) I am for magazine capacity restrictions. 3) I am for a background check with no loopholes. The two areas I am unsure on and do support but cautiously: A) requirement that all firearms must be stored with locked trigger lock or in gun safe. B) gun registration in all cases.
[video=youtube;-j5IN3YwG5Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j5IN3YwG5Y[/video] If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking till you do succeed. [video=youtube;wE-nY60dJLM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE-nY60dJLM[/video]
What kind of gun isn't "semi-automatic" ? A musket. Some bolt action rifles. Pump action shotguns. People are talking about a ban on the vast majority of guns. But it'll never happen because people realize what a semi-automatic gun is? http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/semi-automatic-gun-assault-weapon-definitions The vast majority of modern guns sold and collected in the US are semiautomatic, which means they fire a single shot with every pull of the trigger, but automatically reload between shots. That's in contrast to full-automatic weapons, as well as single-shot guns that require the operator to "cock" the gun or hand-feed ammunition between shots. (There are a variety of sporting weapons that are single shot, such as lever-action, bolt-action, and breech-loading rifles, pump-action shotguns, and many revolvers.)
I'll take your bet. Not that I think the tax will be 500%, but what's not to like about 40:1 odds? As I've said before, gun control advocates have stated that their game plan is to take any incremental control that they can get any chance that they get. The tax doesn't have to be 500%. That number is just out there because that's what (then Senator) Obama said. The fact is, this tax (if it even happens), whatever the increase, would be just another infringement on the second amendment, in a long string of annoying and ineffective infringements on the rights of the people. That will not stop until we don't have a second amendment right. Registration provides the list to complete their end game. No guns for law abiding citizens. (Even though they KNOW the bad guys will still have guns.) People that value their rights get annoyed that this shit has been going on for years, and during the whole time it's the same ol' lines from the gun control advocates. 'You're just paranoid. You gun owners always act like the sky is falling. You gun owners are hallucinating that this has been going on for years, so you just listen to right wing gun freaks to get yourselves all worked up over nothing. You just parrot Rush, Beck, Heston, or [fill in the pro gun villain of the time.]' I think we should require background checks before you can get a driver's license. They should do a DNA check to see if you are likely to be a heavy drinker sometime in your life. If so, or if you are insane, or a felon, you shouldn't get a driver's license. If you are ever convicted of domestic violence, you should have your cars taken away permanently. You should not be allowed to buy a replacement. It should be a felony for you if someone steals your car and hurts someone while driving it. So, a couple of clairifications about that bet. I guess the bet's for the duration of President Obama's time in office? You win if the tax is increased 500% or less? Who do you want to have hold the money for us? I'll send my ten bucks tomorrow, just tell me where. Am I limited to $10? Go Blazers
Ok sir, in the bet I said 1 year, but I am fine with the remainder of Obama's term. Hold onto the money for now, I'm not putting 400 in escrow for three years to win ten. I am trustworthy, I have donated to causes on these boards, and will donate to you if I lose. As for when I win, that ten can go towards cancer research. By the way, as a semi-liberal, I don't want your guns taken away, I just want laws passed that will help keep guns out of the hands of criminals. I understand that many liberals do want guns taken away. I would join your side if it ever came to that. But background checks and securing firearms I believe are actions that could have a positive effect.
You don't have to want my guns taken away. If you support registration, you are willing to provide a means for the government to take guns if they want to. If they decide to take the guns, they won't ask for your opinion. Your sympathy for my loss would be of small consequence at that point, don't you think? If you want to keep the guns out of the hands of the criminals, lobby to enforce the thousands of laws regarding guns that already exist. In Oregon a felon can get 10 years for being in possession of a firearm. The government doesn't have the money to put them away for that long so, instead, they control the guns of non-criminals. Yay! Go Blazers
FWIW, I'm not the one who made this 500% tax claim. You did, GOD. In Chicago and the state of California, they're considering a $.05 per bullet tax. Considering a bullet costs ~$.20, that's a 25% tax. In Connecticut, they considered a 50% tax on all ammunition buys. You say, "see, it didn't happen" and I say, "they're trying and they'll eventually succeed." I wouldn't take your bet because you seem to think there's some time limit on when they'll succeed or that they'll somehow give up.
IMO, this is the primary reason for the price increase. Furthermore, it is my opinion that this purchase order was a policy decision to increase scarcity. I guess there's actually a hearing on it. Note that the reduction in purchases has to do with sequestration: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...gency-using-1000-more-rounds-per-person-than/
The part of this debate for me that matters has nothing to do with guns. It has to do with how one views the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. For me, it's a list of things the Government CANNOT do to you. It serves as a limit on government. And what kind of restriction would I be willing to accept on weaponry? Simple. Anything the police can have, I can have. I'm a believer in the idea that where government fears the people, there is liberty and where the people fear the government, there is tyranny. I'm for liberty.
No takers for the DNA background check for a driver's license? No need to stop the carnage on the road caused by drunk drivers. Where is the 'if it could save just one life, it's worth it' crowd? Go Blazers
Sorry I stopped reading this right wing circle jerk a while ago. I'd sign up. I would also like to add a stipulation that you have to report anytime you sell your car to someone else. And if the car is stolen without you reporting it, then it causes an accident, you are to blame. e: and while we're playing this "i'm crazier than you game." I genuinely would also want everyone who is on welfare to be required to take birth control. I also think everyone should be allowed no more than 3 children. (yes, I am a "liberal" and yes I'm serious.)
I think that all cars must have a mandatory breathalyzer installed before the car starts. Anyone over the limit will not be able to start the car.
Why is DHS buying up so much ammo? Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...00-more-rounds-per-person-than/#ixzz2RYPrw37w Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...00-more-rounds-per-person-than/#ixzz2RYQ88roE
Classic. If I think it's better to keep my constitutional rights than to give them up for no reason, then I'm a right winger. Cool. What do you call my lefty friends that don't want their second amendment rights further infringed upon? There is already a law that says you must report the sale of your car. So let's make another law that says the same thing. Then we'll be twice as safe. Or, just maybe they should enforce the existing law instead of duplicating an existing one....but maybe that's just me. Apparently, you did quit reading. What I said was if your car is stolen and hurts someone, the legitimate owner should be charged with a felony....just like President Obama suggested about stolen guns. You're ok with the idea of losing your cars permanently, if you are convicted of domestic violence? Never be able to replace those cars? Screw it, go for the gusto. Let's just sterilize those lazy welfare bastards. Seriously, how could any true liberal ever suggest that any of the 47%'ers be demeaned like that? I think you might be a closet conservative, and just don’t know it. Come into the light, young man. How do you propose to enforce that three child limit? Once the third kid is born, the woman is spayed and the man is castrated? Or, maybe just abort any further pregnacies? Go Blazers
This was a crack at gun control. I didn't say you could do these things. Sterilizing is not permanent.
