Stuff

Eventually. The challenges are a wee bit steeper in America's case, though, obviously -- otherwise one of Obama's various initiatives would already have worked.

This is the country whose opposition went full scorched-earth against freaking health insurance and managed to stretch that battle out until like a week ago.

I support the right to own guns, but agree there is no reason we need to own AK-47's or the like.

I can kill an asshole in my house with one shot, I don't need 50

as for healthcare? Sorry if the middle class did not feel they should pay for the healthcare of the poor and the wealthy....
 
I support the right to own guns, but agree there is no reason we need to own AK-47's or the like.

I can kill an asshole in my house with one shot, I don't need 50

as for healthcare? Sorry if the middle class did not feel they should pay for the healthcare of the poor and the wealthy....

We have guns, but I do think assault weapons and cop-killer ammo should be restricted.
 
Thankfully I think the nuttery with the ACA is over now. The Supreme Court pretty much put a fork in that one.

And in the above remarks, I mean: due respect to John Howard who I'm sure is a fine man, but he's talking about passing legislation in a country there with a population about the size of metropolitan New York. I'm not trying to be all American exceptionalism about it but really is kind of apples and oranges.

(And I would love to see something serious happen on the subject in the USA as it ultimately affects all of us on this continent, but one thing we know by now is that the NRA's hold on Congress goes deep. Obama's own party wouldn't move on firearms, probably still won't for a while. It's fucking absurd but there it is. One of the Dems' major up and coming gun control advocates got busted for fucking gun running last year, you can't make this shit up; America has not yet begun to spelunk its cave system of noxious crazy when it comes to firearms.)
 
Last edited:
We have guns, but I do think assault weapons and cop-killer ammo should be restricted.

Assault weapons should be banned.

Why in the fuck would any citizen carry an assault rifle?

Because freedom?

Fucking insane.
 
It's like Pandora's box, isn't it?
In my view, by now every homicidal nutcase in the US must have bought a gun already. So if you suddenly put a ban on guns, you stop others from trying to protect themselves against potential nutter intruders
My brain gets tangled trying to think of the right answer.
 
Thankfully I think the nuttery with the ACA is over now. The Supreme Court pretty much put a fork in that one.

And in the above remarks, I mean: due respect to John Howard who I'm sure is a fine man, but he's talking about passing legislation in a country there with a population about the size of metropolitan New York. I'm not trying to be all American exceptionalism about it but really is kind of apples and oranges.

(And I would love to see something serious happen on the subject in the USA as it ultimately affects all of us on this continent, but one thing we know by now is that the NRA's hold on Congress goes deep. Obama's own party wouldn't move on firearms, probably still won't for a while. It's fucking absurd but there it is.)

It's just too hard for the US. Because more people.

Fucking wake up.

There are nations out there who make you lot look like a dot on the map, and still they manage.
 
It's like Pandora's box, isn't it?
In my view, by now every homicidal nutcase in the US must have bought a gun already. So if you suddenly put a ban on guns, you stop others from trying to protect themselves against potential nutter intruders
My brain gets tangled trying to think of the right answer.

The original framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights were clear on the fact that England would have very much liked for the Americans to not be armed.

For me it's more about tyranny of a government over the governed in its inception.

Guns are low tech, there's no way to limit it or stop it. If we could please stop selling military-grade cop killers at unregistered gun shows, yes, though. Let's do that.
 
It's just too hard for the US. Because more people.

Fucking wake up.

There are nations out there who make you lot look like a dot on the map, and still they manage.

No, it's hard because philosophy and history. I'd like them limited on the higher ranges, but I do think knowing how to work a gun should be licensed and trained the same way someone should know how to work a car.
 
No, it's hard because philosophy and history. I'd like them limited on the higher ranges, but I do think knowing how to work a gun should be licensed and trained the same way someone should know how to work a car.

I'm glad to be Australian. Not proud, not flag-waving, not ALL POWERFUL, just glad.
 
It's just too hard for the US. Because more people.

Fucking wake up.

There are nations out there who make you lot look like a dot on the map, and still they manage.

I'm from Canada.

And yes, scale is part of it but mainly it's that the American political system is broken and trying to transit out of a deadlock that movement conservatism foisted on it for forty years.

Unfortunately nobody can wave a wand and just Make That Happen, including Obama. Being all Just Roll Up Yr Sleeves and Get It Done Boy is silliness, like I already told you it was a legislative priority for him, if it was that easy it would already be done. Good to be passionate about the issue and all but if you're really interested in what America is or isn't doing, it's a good idea to get informed about why the situation is what it is.
 
I'm glad to be Australian. Not proud, not flag-waving, not ALL POWERFUL, just glad.

That's cool. I love my country, but other people love their countries and that's great.

I was just raised by a father who had about 6 rifles and used them throughout his life to hunt. Guns were not a big deal. I took a rifle to school as Annie Oakley for Halloween.

I know how to use guns, I've lived around them my entire life, I don't understand the relative hysteria and fear over a useful tool that clearly doesn't create insanity by its mere proximity.

My dad also taught me to defend myself through combat. I'm proud of that, I'm proud of the precision and lack of fear when dealing with potentially dangerous outside forces that clearly exist.

During World War II it was also really nice that we had a lot of guns and knew how to use them.

Say bunches of whatever about political bullshit from our Government and crazies in politics, I get that, not arguing that. I am proud of the people who aren't in government or politics, like my dad, who just wanted to be omnicompetent.
 
I'm from Canada.

And yes, scale is part of it but mainly it's that the American political system is broken and trying to transit out of a deadlock that movement conservatism foisted on it for forty years.

Unfortunately nobody can wave a wand and just Make That Happen, including Obama. Being all Just Roll Up Yr Sleeves and Get It Done Boy is silliness, like I already told you it was a legislative priority for him, if it was that easy it would already be done. Good to be passionate about the issue and all but if you're really interested in what America is or isn't doing, it's a good idea to get informed about why the situation is what it is.

No, because nobody has ever waved their magic wand and did that ever. Nobody ever took the guns away which is exactly what happened in Australia.

Make it law and never look back.

Try harder. For your country. Don't make excuses for them.
 
Armor-piercing rounds.

Ap rounds are pretty hard to come by legally. They were banned a long time ago.

Ammo that is intended to pierce Kevlar or the defenses of SWAT.

Most armor is designed to stop big, slow bullets like 9mm or 45acp. Most rifle bullets will tear through kevlar like butter. Thats why they started adding trauma plates.

That being said I can see both sides of the arguments. But then how do the areas with the strictest gun laws have the highest level of gun crimes?
 
Ap rounds are pretty hard to come by legally. They were banned a long time ago.

Most armor is designed to stop big, slow bullets like 9mm or 45acp. Most rifle bullets will tear through kevlar like butter. Thats why they started adding trauma plates.

That being said I can see both sides of the arguments. But then how do the areas with the strictest gun laws have the highest level of gun crimes?

Escalation of armaments. I'm for the spirit of the law having to do with an average citizen not being denied the right to train to defend themselves, but I'll take law enforcement and military advice regarding how it is that they need to best do their job.

They're still going to have to adapt and escalate their armaments and defenses because making it illegal as we know, doesn't keep it from existing.
 
That being said my home defense is a 22 mag revolver. A 22 will stop a burgler just as well as a 9mm. Hell the military 223 is just a 22 with more powder and a pointy bullet.
 
That being said my home defense is a 22 mag revolver. A 22 will stop a burgler just as well as a 9mm. Hell the military 223 is just a 22 with more powder and a pointy bullet.

We have a few .22 pistols and Ulaven took a .22 rifle and got me a custom stock. Weak wrists, years of typing.

I prefer the rifle for the intimidation factor.
 
Try harder. For your country. Don't make excuses for them.

EDIT: Taking this again.

1) Actually knowing what one is talking about is different from "making excuses" (like I already told you, I want to see the problem solved, but dumb motherfuckers lecturing Obama about how Australia did it is irrelevant to making that happen -- same reasons Canada's experience isn't relevant to actually making a law happen in the States);

2) yes Australia has not faced a comparable political problem (or wasn't when Howard was making that legislation);

3) Your reply above makes me wonder if you even know Canada and the US aren't the same country, which is not encouraging, so I'm stopping now.
 
Last edited:
We have a few .22 pistols and Ulaven took a .22 rifle and got me a custom stock. Weak wrists, years of typing.

I prefer the rifle for the intimidation factor.

I have the revolver and a 22 rifle. I also have 2 ww2 era bolt action rifles. One is swiss and the other is russian. the Russian one isnt the most accurate but is indestructible. With the swiss rifle i can hit tea plate sized targets at 100 yards all day.
 
EDIT: Taking this again.

1) Actually knowing what one is talking about is different from "making excuses" (like I already told you, I want to see the problem solved, but dumb motherfuckers lecturing Obama about how Australia did it is irrelevant to making that happen -- same reasons Canada's experience isn't relevant to actually making a law happen in the States);

2) yes Australia has not faced a comparable political problem (or wasn't when Howard was making that legislation);

3) Your reply above makes me wonder if you even know Canada and the US aren't the same country, which is not encouraging, so I'm stopping now.

Heh. I kinda liked the original version, very Un-Canadian :D
 
Back
Top