Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million

[Common]

Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million For Selling Weapon That Injured Police Officers
A jury ordered a Wisconsin gun store on Tuesday to pay nearly $6 million to two Milwaukee police officers who were shot and seriously wounded by a gun purchased at the store. The ruling came in a negligence lawsuit that the officers filed against the owners and operators of Badger Guns. The suit alleged the shop allowed an illegal sale despite several warning signs that should have prompted a store clerk to stop the transaction and know the gun was being sold to a "straw buyer," or someone who was buying the gun for someone who couldn't legally do so.

Jurors sided with the officers, ruling that the store was negligent in selling the gun.
Officer Bryan Norberg and retired Officer Graham Kunisch were both shot in the face after they stopped Julius Burton for riding his bike on the sidewalk in the summer of 2009. Surveillance video shows the officers scuffled with Burton and slammed him into a wall before he shot them both in the face.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gun-shop-ordered-to-pay-6-million-for-selling-weapon-that-injured-police-officers_561d8d0ae4b0c5a1ce6108b8

[exotix]

Now legal precedence for every family who's loved ones were maimed and murdered by guns.

[Captain Obvious]

Now legal precedence for every family who's loved ones were maimed and murdered by guns.

:biglaugh:

[domer76]

Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million For Selling Weapon That Injured Police Officers


A jury ordered a Wisconsin gun store on Tuesday to pay nearly $6 million to two Milwaukee police officers who were shot and seriously wounded by a gun purchased at the store. The ruling came in a negligence lawsuit that the officers filed against the owners and operators of Badger Guns. The suit alleged the shop allowed an illegal sale despite several warning signs that should have prompted a store clerk to stop the transaction and know the gun was being sold to a "straw buyer," or someone who was buying the gun for someone who couldn't legally do so.

Jurors sided with the officers, ruling that the store was negligent in selling the gun.
Officer Bryan Norberg and retired Officer Graham Kunisch were both shot in the face after they stopped Julius Burton for riding his bike on the sidewalk in the summer of 2009. Surveillance video shows the officers scuffled with Burton and slammed him into a wall before he shot them both in the face.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gun-shop-ordered-to-pay-6-million-for-selling-weapon-that-injured-police-officers_561d8d0ae4b0c5a1ce6108b8

Good. This is the type of legal precedence that needs to be set. And the type I have referred to in other threads. Now, find the straw purchaser and prosecute them to the max.

[The Xl]

Completely asinine.

[Peter1469]

Now legal precedence for every family who's loved ones were maimed and murdered by guns.

Except for the negligence part. The store had a long history of sloppy sales practices. The witness testimony was discussed in another thread and shows the sales clerk knew or should have known something was fishy with the buyer.

And straw man purchases are already illegal.

What is your favorite color, Exo?

[Tahuyaman]

Now legal precedence for every family who's loved ones were maimed and murdered by guns.


Why not be as aggressive going after the human beings who actually do the maiming and murdering?

[Common]

First let me say this, it hasnt been appealed yet and secondly this case was fought on a straw man lawsuit. It was not a direct lawsuit for just selling a gun. It was for selling a gun to a person who was buying it for someone else who couldnt qualify to buy a gun. Even if its upheld in the appeals, it will be very narrow and rarely applied.

[Captain Obvious]

Except for the negligence part.

What is your favorite color, Exo?

Just smile and nod, he's in his happy place.

[exotix]

Except for the negligence part.

What is your favorite color, Exo?You all look the same to me ... LOL


http://i60.tinypic.com/2j5dwep.png

http://media.thecelebrityauction.co/picture/99/c2299563802c49d79f853fd3e97340.jpg?i=CxcXE1lMTApTT RQTTQAMDkwRAgcCEQwNDwoNBk0ADA5MFBNOAAwNFwYNF0wWEw8 MAgcQTFFTUlZMU1tMBAYMEQQGThkKDg4GEQ4CDU4ADA0FBgcGE QIXBk4FDwIETQkTBA==

[GrassrootsConservative]

Now, find the straw purchaser and prosecute them to the max.

Of course the shooter gets no hate because he is helping to advance the leftist agenda of gun control.

The shooter is the one I think should be punished, but surely this country full of morons doesn't agree here.

[domer76]

Of course the shooter gets no hate because he is helping to advance the leftist agenda of gun control.

The shooter is the one I think should be punished, but surely this country full of morons doesn't agree here.

Can your post get much more ignorant? Nope

[Tahuyaman]

Of course the shooter gets no hate because he is helping to advance the leftist agenda of gun control.

The shooter is the one I think should be punished, but surely this country full of morons doesn't agree here.

no, in their mind the actual criminal is a victim too.

[domer76]

no, in their mind the actual criminal is a victim too.

^ignorance plus 1

[Tahuyaman]

Can your post get much more ignorant? Nope

it could if he would just cut and paste yours.

[domer76]

The firearms equivalent of dram shop and I'm lovin' it!

[Tahuyaman]

no, in their mind the actual criminal is a victim too.


^ignorance plus 1

then why aren't you as upset about the actual criminal as you are about the tools he uses?

[domer76]

then why aren't you as upset about the actual criminal as you are about the tools he uses?

I never said a word about the shooter, so how would you know how I felt about him? That's right! You don't have a fucking clue! Some things just don't change....

[GrassrootsConservative]

Can your post get much more ignorant? Nope

Lol you know someone has been nailed when they have to answer their own questions.

Let me know when you make a post vilifying a shooter instead of the right, the NRA, gun shops, the 2nd amendment, or police.

I wont be holding my breath.

[Tahuyaman]

I never said a word about the shooter.

thats right. The actual criminal doesn't even register with you.

[domer76]

Lol you know someone has been nailed when they have to answer their own questions.

Let me know when you make a post vilifying a shooter instead of the right, the NRA, gun shops, the 2nd amendment, or police.

I wont be holding my breath.

Here's a clue, Jethro. This thread is about the fuckwads in the gun shop and the (insufficient) fine. Try to keep up. Have someone pinch your head when you're ready to buy a clue.

Why did I answer the question? Because you idiots are incapable.

And please do hold your breath.

[domer76]

thats right. The actual criminal doesn't even register with you.

^NFC (not a fucking clue)

[Tahuyaman]

then why aren't you as upset about the actual criminal as you are about the tools he uses?


I never said a word about the shooter, so how would you know how I felt about him? That's right! You don't have a $#@!ing clue! Some things just don't change....


thats right. The actual criminal doesn't even register with you.


^NFC (not a $#@!ing clue)

Odd responses.

The actual perpetrators of the crimes don't even come into the picture with you.

[domer76]

Odd responses.

The actual perpetrators of the crimes don't even come into the picture with you.

Let's try this again, Rufus. The topic of this thread is about the shitweasels in the gun shop. And, one more time, but probably not the last, since I have made no comment about the shooter, you don't have a single fucking idea of my take on the perpetrator. Just pulling more suppositional shit out of your ass. You are predictable!

Thread banned for bad faith insults and taunts.

[Tahuyaman]

And like I said, the shooter isn't on your radar.

I'm sure I could get you to finally come out and say that the shooter is as much of a victim of something as the actual victim.

[Private Pickle]

Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million For Selling Weapon That Injured Police Officers


A jury ordered a Wisconsin gun store on Tuesday to pay nearly $6 million to two Milwaukee police officers who were shot and seriously wounded by a gun purchased at the store. The ruling came in a negligence lawsuit that the officers filed against the owners and operators of Badger Guns. The suit alleged the shop allowed an illegal sale despite several warning signs that should have prompted a store clerk to stop the transaction and know the gun was being sold to a "straw buyer," or someone who was buying the gun for someone who couldn't legally do so.

Jurors sided with the officers, ruling that the store was negligent in selling the gun.
Officer Bryan Norberg and retired Officer Graham Kunisch were both shot in the face after they stopped Julius Burton for riding his bike on the sidewalk in the summer of 2009. Surveillance video shows the officers scuffled with Burton and slammed him into a wall before he shot them both in the face.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gun-shop-ordered-to-pay-6-million-for-selling-weapon-that-injured-police-officers_561d8d0ae4b0c5a1ce6108b8

Declare bankruptcy and reopen in another State. Fuck them.

[zelmo1234]

Here's a clue, Jethro. This thread is about the $#@!wads in the gun shop and the (insufficient) fine. Try to keep up. Have someone pinch your head when you're ready to buy a clue.

Why did I answer the question? Because you idiots are incapable.

And please do hold your breath.

'What about the liberal Fuck Wads and Judgers that refused to do anything about the Obama administration running over 2000 guns to the Mexican Drug cartels and they actually murdered a border patrol officer and several others

What is it they are responsible for?

[domer76]

And like I said, the shooter isn't on your radar.

I'm sure I could get you to finally come out and say that the shooter is as much of a victim of something as the actual victim.

You might, Cluelessman, if that were the topic. But, as I predicted when I said I'd have to point it out to you again, the gun shop owners are the topic of this thread.

[exotix]

'What about the liberal $#@! Wads and Judgers that refused to do anything about the Obama administration running over 2000 guns to the Mexican Drug cartels and they actually murdered a border patrol officer and several others

What is it they are responsible for?Good point ... you should start a thread on it ... this thread is about hillbillies selling guns to blacks to shoot cops.

[domer76]

Declare bankruptcy and reopen in another State. Fuck them.

Take away their license to do business. Let them open a bakery

[domer76]

'What about the liberal Fuck Wads and Judgers that refused to do anything about the Obama administration running over 2000 guns to the Mexican Drug cartels and they actually murdered a border patrol officer and several others

What is it they are responsible for?

You guys sure want to avoid this topic, don't you?

<laughter>

[Cthulhu]

6 million?

Whatever. Progressives get what they deserve in the end.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Tahuyaman]

You might, Cluelessman, if that were the topic. But, as I predicted when I said I'd have to point it out to you again, the gun shop owners are the topic of this thread.

I've never noticed that you were such a stickler for staying exactly on topic.

[domer76]

6 million?

Whatever. Progressives get what they deserve in the end.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

Not enough.

[zelmo1234]

Let's try this again, Rufus. The topic of this thread is about the $#@!weasels in the gun shop. And, one more time, but probably not the last, since I have made no comment about the shooter, you don't have a single $#@!ing idea of my take on the perpetrator. Just pulling more suppositional $#@! out of your ass. You are predictable!

Here is the thing you sissy boy gun grabbers have a President that is very soft on prosecuting gun crimes with the felony firearms you refuse to answer this because just like when Obama was in Mexico City promising to get tuff on gun shop owner on the boarder, all while he was the one running the guns.

Truth is you don't want to prosecute the criminals, because you are trying to tell everyone that drugs are a victimless crime, which of course it is not.

No you lying sacks want new laws that you will not enforce and then more that won't be enforced, until the time you think that you can take the fund away from the people. you want a disarmed public because you want to be able to rule over them with an iron fist.

[domer76]

I've never noticed that you were such a stickler for staying exactly on topic.

I've seen the evil of my ways and turned over a new leaf!

[Cthulhu]

Not enough.
I agree, progressives never really get what they deserve.

At least soon enough.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[zelmo1234]

You guys sure want to avoid this topic, don't you?

<laughter>

Answer the Question, Why will Obama not enforce the laws on the books

[Tahuyaman]

I've seen the evil of my ways and turned over a new leaf!

I doubt that. You're just missing your soul mate, del.

[zelmo1234]

Good point ... you should start a thread on it ... this thread is about hillbillies selling guns to blacks to shoot cops.

How is that different that Obama selling guns to Mexicans to shoot boarder patrol agents?

[Tahuyaman]

Answer the Question, Why will Obama not enforce the laws on the books

because he, like most liberals, believe criminals are just as much the victim as those they victimize.

[Common]

All of you re read this

First let me say this, it hasnt been appealed yet and secondly this case was fought on a straw man lawsuit. It was not a direct lawsuit for just selling a gun. It was for selling a gun to a person who was buying it for someone else who couldnt qualify to buy a gun. Even if its upheld in the appeals, it will be very narrow and rarely applied.

[exotix]

How is that different that Obama selling guns to Mexicans to shoot boarder patrol agents?Easy ... that was to bring down the Drug Cartels ... only a certifiable mind like yours could possibly compare that to white hillbillies profiting from selling guns to blacks to kill cops ...

I say certifiable because this kind of deflection from the topic is in fact a sickness.

Sad.

[Bob]

All of you re read this

First let me say this, it hasnt been appealed yet and secondly this case was fought on a straw man lawsuit. It was not a direct lawsuit for just selling a gun. It was for selling a gun to a person who was buying it for someone else who couldnt qualify to buy a gun. Even if its upheld in the appeals, it will be very narrow and rarely applied.

That makes sense given it will be appealed. And the straw man is serving time in jail.

[Bob]

Easy ... that was to bring down the Drug Cartels ... only a certifiable mind like yours could possibly compare that to white hillbillies profiting from selling guns to blacks to kill cops ...

I say certifiable because this kind of deflection from the topic is in fact a sickness.

Sad.

Obama failed. Bet that burns your grits.

[Private Pickle]

Take away their license to do business. Let them open a bakery

Or not.

[exotix]

Look at all these dumbski's responding to Donner who's been TB'd .... idiots ... LOL

[Tahuyaman]

Easy ... that was to bring down the Drug Cartels ...

How did that work out?

[Tahuyaman]

Look at all these dumbski's responding to Donner who's been TB'd .... idiots ... LOL

OK. I'll start concentrating on your dumb comments.

[exotix]

OK. I'll start concentrating on your dumb comments.Oh, you don't want to go up against the exotix on this topic ... unless of course you brought your apoplexy meds ... LOL

[Tahuyaman]

Look at all these dumbski's responding to Donner who's been TB'd .... idiots ... LOL


Thats also an inaccurate comment

[Tahuyaman]

Oh, you don't want to go up against the exotix on this topic ... unless of course you brought your apoplexy meds ... LOL

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs5EMk8PpTQ

[Crepitus]

Of course the shooter gets no hate because he is helping to advance the leftist agenda of gun control.

The shooter is the one I think should be punished, but surely this country full of morons doesn't agree here.
The shooter is already convicted and sentenced IIRC.

[Redrose]

Now legal precedence for every family who's loved ones were maimed and murdered by guns.


Does the same apply to liquor stores who sell to over 21 adults buying for underage drinkers who get DUI's and kill people?

[HoneyBadger]

I'm not sure how this will hold up on appeal.

According the the prosecution:

Burton was with Collins and pointed to the gun he wanted.

Okay... that presumes the clerk saw the encounter and heard Burton say he wanted that gun. Even then, that could have been part of a larger conversation the clerk wasn't privy to.

Collins initially marked that he was not the buyer of the gun on the form but was allowed to change the answer.

This refers to question 11A on ATF4473 which reads:

Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form? Warning: You are not the actual buyer if you are
acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm(s) to you.
(See Instructions for Question 11.a.) Exception: If you are picking up a repaired firearm(s) for another person, you are not required to answer question 11A

Believe it or not, I've seen people who are totally confused by this question. This can generally be cleared up by asking the buyer if they are purchasing this firearm for themselves. And yes, it is legal to change your answer on a 4473 if you mistakenly enter erroneous information as long as it's corrected before the transfer is completed.

Burton was also allowed to change his address.

Again, that's perfectly legal as long as Burton had identification with the correct address.



Collins and Burton left the store because Burton didn't have enough cash to pay for the gun. Collins didn't present an ID when he picked up the gun.

If he came back right away and the same clerk transferred the firearm to him, there's no problem with that. None of the news stories mention if this was the case. If the clerk remembered the transaction, he doesn't have to present ID again because the clerk was already required to verify ID/address on the 4473. The type of ID must be listed on the 4473.

If it was a busy day and the clerk didn't shadow them from the minute they walked into the store, it's entirely possible for a straw purchaser to game the system, even with the actual buyer standing next to them. It's not even remotely unusual for two guys to come into a store, discuss various firearms and for only one of them to purchase a firearm.

I'd love to see the transcripts of the closing remarks. A good lawyer would have been able to rebut misrepresentations from the prosecution.

[AeonPax]

`
`
Worth noting; "Badger Guns and Badger Outdoors were top sellers of crime guns recovered in Milwaukee for more than a decade. In 2005, Badger Outdoors was the top seller of crime guns in the nation with 537 such weapons recovered." - source (http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/jury-finds-for-wounded-officers-in-badger-guns-lawsuit-b99596217z1-332567372.html)

[Peter1469]

Does the same apply to liquor stores who sell to over 21 adults buying for underage drinkers who get DUI's and kill people?

If you can prove the store knew or should have known. In this case with the gun store there was a lot of evidence that they did. Likely not enough evidence for a criminal trial, but this was a civil trial.

[Peter1469]

A responsible gun seller would have figured something was strange.... Also, evidence at the trial suggests that this conduct by the gun store (actively looking away) was habitual. The state should revoke their business license. They don't need to be selling firearms.


I'm not sure how this will hold up on appeal.

According the the prosecution:

Burton was with Collins and pointed to the gun he wanted.

Okay... that presumes the clerk saw the encounter and heard Burton say he wanted that gun. Even then, that could have been part of a larger conversation the clerk wasn't privy to.

Collins initially marked that he was not the buyer of the gun on the form but was allowed to change the answer.

This refers to question 11A on ATF4473 which reads:

Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form? Warning: You are not the actual buyer if you are
acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm(s) to you.
(See Instructions for Question 11.a.) Exception: If you are picking up a repaired firearm(s) for another person, you are not required to answer question 11A

Believe it or not, I've seen people who are totally confused by this question. This can generally be cleared up by asking the buyer if they are purchasing this firearm for themselves. And yes, it is legal to change your answer on a 4473 if you mistakenly enter erroneous information as long as it's corrected before the transfer is completed.

Burton was also allowed to change his address.

Again, that's perfectly legal as long as Burton had identification with the correct address.



Collins and Burton left the store because Burton didn't have enough cash to pay for the gun. Collins didn't present an ID when he picked up the gun.

If he came back right away and the same clerk transferred the firearm to him, there's no problem with that. None of the news stories mention if this was the case. If the clerk remembered the transaction, he doesn't have to present ID again because the clerk was already required to verify ID/address on the 4473. The type of ID must be listed on the 4473.

If it was a busy day and the clerk didn't shadow them from the minute they walked into the store, it's entirely possible for a straw purchaser to game the system, even with the actual buyer standing next to them. It's not even remotely unusual for two guys to come into a store, discuss various firearms and for only one of them to purchase a firearm.

I'd love to see the transcripts of the closing remarks. A good lawyer would have been able to rebut misrepresentations from the prosecution.

[donttread]

Now legal precedence for every family who's loved ones were maimed and murdered by guns.

But when I bought my last car there were no warnings not to run people over if I was pissed at them . Lawsuits against car dealerships next? Perhaps if they sell me a car and "should have known" that an unlicenced driver would wind up driving it? Lawsuit time? What about kitchen knifes? People just leave them out in the open in front of children and everything!

[exotix]

But when I bought my last car there were no warnings not to run people over if I was pissed at them . Lawsuits against car dealerships next? Perhaps if they sell me a car and "should have known" that an unlicenced driver would wind up driving it? Lawsuit time? What about kitchen knifes? People just leave them out in the open in front of children and everything!I suggest dropping a little more acid ... you might, you just might ... be able to believe cars were designed to kill.

[BB-35]

I suggest dropping a little more acid ... you might, you just might ... be able to believe cars were designed to kill.
What makes you think guns are?

[Common Sense]

What makes you think guns are?

Because they are.

[Crepitus]

What makes you think guns are?
LMAO!

I like guns, own a bunch, carry daily, very pro 2A, and this still cracks me up every time somebody says it.

[Matty]

Abortion is designed to kill. Now if someone suggested tougher background checks on PP what would the anti gun crowd think?............I think we know.

[exotix]

Abortion is designed to kill. Now if someone suggested tougher background checks on PP what would the anti gun crowd think?............I think we know.
You're against abortion but pro-gun-massacre of men, women, children and kindergartners ... and you don't even need tabs of acid to believe that.

Sad.

[Matty]

You're against abortion but pro-gun-massacre of men, women, children and kindergartners ... and you don't even need tabs of acid to believe that.

Sad.


Conversely you love abortion but are against guns killing people and you have been dropping acid far too long. You don't even know your favorite color. Sad.

[exotix]

Conversely you love abortion but are against guns killing people and you have been dropping acid far too long. You don't even know your favorite color. Sad.
Going through life like Truth Detector and Ransom is even sadder .... LOL

[BB-35]

Because they are.
No,they aren't

[Chris]

Abortion is designed to kill. Now if someone suggested tougher background checks on PP what would the anti gun crowd think?............I think we know.


Good counter argument! But the point should not be kill but murder. Guns are not designed to murder, abortion is.

[BB-35]

LMAO!

I like guns, own a bunch, carry daily, very pro 2A, and this still cracks me up every time somebody says it.
Why?

[exotix]

Good counter argument! But the point should not be kill but murder. Guns are not designed to murder, abortion is.
https://images.rapgenius.com/d8fc6fbc0e515022e647f6d424451b12.500x321x1.jpg

[Chris]

https://images.rapgenius.com/d8fc6fbc0e515022e647f6d424451b12.500x321x1.jpg

Is that an excuse for an argument?

[Matty]

Is that an excuse for an argument?


I don't know but Exo needs work in the oral hygiene department. That tongue looks cruddy.

[Tahuyaman]

I don't know but Exo needs work in the oral hygiene department. That tongue looks cruddy.

just dehydration.

[zelmo1234]

You guys sure want to avoid this topic, don't you?

<laughter>

Hold on, that is exactly the topic you want Gun sellers that sell to people they know will commit crimes to be punished?

However; the largest gun runner in our time, The Obama administration, and we know 100% for sure that he knew about it because he used executive privilege to protect the details that would like put AG Holder in Prison.

You don't seem to have an opinion on the man that sold over 2000 of the dreaded assault weapon to Mexican drug cartels and the many people that have lost their life because of it. I say punish the hell out of the Gun store for their crimes and then punish the hell out of the people responsible for the gun running What say you?

[zelmo1234]

Easy ... that was to bring down the Drug Cartels ... only a certifiable mind like yours could possibly compare that to white hillbillies profiting from selling guns to blacks to kill cops ...

I say certifiable because this kind of deflection from the topic is in fact a sickness.

No it was not, or they would have tracked the guns, which they did not we know this for sure.

It was to increase gun crimes on the boarder. Obama let the cat out of the bag in Mexico City when he said they were going to crack down on the gun store owners that were selling these weapons.

He just did not know that they had recorded the phone calls of his administration ordering them to do so!

So your post is false, if they had wanted to target the cartels, they would have had to track the guns.

Sad.

[Tahuyaman]

You're against abortion but pro-gun-massacre of men, women, children and kindergartners ... and you don't even need tabs of acid to believe that.

Sad.

Exo is the typical left winger who has no rational basis to defend his views. If you oppose gun control, he claims that you are in favor of mass murder and the massacre of school children.

If that's true, it's just as rational to say that those who are pro choice support abortion being used for genocidal purposes.

[zelmo1234]

I suggest dropping a little more acid ... you might, you just might ... be able to believe cars were designed to kill.

What where these guns designed for they are kind of evil looking

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSTGoh1VQAhMsEy9F5zbBAauMizswOes tNbCazLCLuiNWBrktKBq6FJhdx5 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAMQjRxqFQoTCNKY0_CfwsgCFQPYPgodoCUFjw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shotgunforums.com%2Fforums%2F trap-shooting%2F1136-show-us-your-trap-gun-2.html&psig=AFQjCNF6eEQcZID5lb4Hm15cLy9JcXnxmQ&ust=1444921956170239)

What about these large capacity pistol are they killing machines or what

http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Hammererlli-SP20.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCJTeuamgwsgCFQINPgodGSMOGA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guns.com%2Freview%2F2014%2F09 %2F04%2Fbullseye-bullseye-top-six-rimfire-pistols%2F&psig=AFQjCNExlt_QI94Jfa9S9riFNg0Mk6ZoNQ&ust=1444922060893592)

And then there is this nasty little number

http://blackdogmachinellc.net/images/products/detail/SU22_2663.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCNmFh9mgwsgCFUUaPgod7VYFYg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblackdogmachinellc.net%2Far15-.22-conversion-25rd-mag.aspx&psig=AFQjCNHX3E-JNYUmpd5OJGTRn1yvSv6qVQ&ust=1444922134078995)

That one is evil for sure! They were all designed to kill right?

[JDubya]

http://s18.postimg.org/4vw80rmrt/food_drink_fruitcakes_fruit_cakes_nutters_nuts_y.j pg

[Cletus]

LMAO!

I like guns, own a bunch, carry daily, very pro 2A, and this still cracks me up every time somebody says it.

Maybe it wouldn't if you knew more about guns.

[Jets]

Interesting. Lets see how this shakes out after its appealed.

[Cletus]

Interesting. Lets see how this shakes out after its appealed.

Agreed.

If the store knew that clown was making a straw purchase and they let it happen, they need to be hammered. However, just making some corrections on a 4473, someone pointing to a gun on a case, and not checking the ID on someone whose ID you checked a few minutes before should not be sufficient grounds to make that assumption.

[Chloe]

What where these guns designed for they are kind of evil looking

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSTGoh1VQAhMsEy9F5zbBAauMizswOes tNbCazLCLuiNWBrktKBq6FJhdx5 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAMQjRxqFQoTCNKY0_CfwsgCFQPYPgodoCUFjw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shotgunforums.com%2Fforums%2F trap-shooting%2F1136-show-us-your-trap-gun-2.html&psig=AFQjCNF6eEQcZID5lb4Hm15cLy9JcXnxmQ&ust=1444921956170239)

What about these large capacity pistol are they killing machines or what

http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Hammererlli-SP20.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCJTeuamgwsgCFQINPgodGSMOGA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guns.com%2Freview%2F2014%2F09 %2F04%2Fbullseye-bullseye-top-six-rimfire-pistols%2F&psig=AFQjCNExlt_QI94Jfa9S9riFNg0Mk6ZoNQ&ust=1444922060893592)

And then there is this nasty little number

http://blackdogmachinellc.net/images/products/detail/SU22_2663.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCNmFh9mgwsgCFUUaPgod7VYFYg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblackdogmachinellc.net%2Far15-.22-conversion-25rd-mag.aspx&psig=AFQjCNHX3E-JNYUmpd5OJGTRn1yvSv6qVQ&ust=1444922134078995)

That one is evil for sure! They were all designed to kill right?

Well they obviously aren't designed to tickle and they clearly aren't designed to heal someone or something. Hunting rifles are designed to kill animals, guns for military are designed to kill enemies, so people, and home defense guns are designed to obviously injure or kill someone else if used. A bullet is meant to penetrate a target and in turn harm or kill. What else would a gun be designed for other than to injure or kill? I'm sure you could use it for fun but the ultimate design is to inflict injury and/or kill.

[Cletus]

Well they obviously aren't designed to tickle and they clearly aren't designed to heal someone or something. Hunting rifles are designed to kill animals, guns for military are designed to kill enemies, so people, and home defense guns are designed to obviously injure or kill someone else if used. A bullet is meant to penetrate a target and in turn harm or kill. What else would a gun be designed for other than to injure or kill? I'm sure you could use it for fun but the ultimate design is to inflict injury and/or kill.

All guns are designed to do exactly the same thing... launch a projectile toward a target designated by the operator. That is all. They are not designed to kill.

[Common Sense]

All guns are designed to do exactly the same thing... launch a projectile toward a target designated by the operator. That is all. They are not designed to kill.

Yeah, no more harmless than a tennis ball machine.

Come on. I own guns and I know full well what they and bullets are designed to do. You're being obtuse.

[Chloe]

All guns are designed to do exactly the same thing... launch a projectile toward a target designated by the operator. That is all. They are not designed to kill.

Why were guns invented?

[Chris]

Why were guns invented?

Unknown but likely hunting, self-defense and warfare.

[Tahuyaman]

Yeah, no more harmless than a tennis ball machine.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WZMOsDI91gI

[Tahuyaman]

Why were guns invented?

do you think they can be uninvented?

[Jets]

Why were guns invented?

Because tossing pumpkins doesn't work as well.

jk :) Nice avatar.

[Chloe]

Unknown but likely hunting, self-defense and warfare.

Right, so they were designed to injure or kill (more likely to kill given the different scenarios). I don't know why people are so afraid to admit that point. It won't make them a sell out to their 2nd amendment friends. It just is what it is.

[Chloe]

do you think they can be uninvented?

No

[Chris]

Right, so they were designed to injure or kill (more likely to kill given the different scenarios). I don't know why people are so afraid to admit that point. It won't make them a sell out to their 2nd amendment friends. It just is what it is.

Sure. But the distinction you would want to make, if you could, is they are designed to murder, but they weren't. Hunting and self-defense are not murder. Only acts of aggression would be considered so. In short, it's not the gun murders but the aggressor.

[Matty]

Before guns was there killing?

[Chris]

Before guns was there killing?

Naturally.

"The direct ancestor of the firearm is the fire lance, a black-powder–filled tube attached to the end of a spear and used as a flamethrower (not to be confused with the Byzantine flamethrower); shrapnel was sometimes placed in the barrel so that it would fly out together with the flames." @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_firearm

Killing isn't always murder.

[Chloe]

Before guns was there killing?

of course

[Chloe]

Naturally.

"The direct ancestor of the firearm is the fire lance, a black-powder–filled tube attached to the end of a spear and used as a flamethrower (not to be confused with the Byzantine flamethrower); shrapnel was sometimes placed in the barrel so that it would fly out together with the flames." @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_firearm

Killing isn't always murder.

That's not what Zelmo and Cletus are saying/implying

[Chris]

That's not what Zelmo and Cletus are saying/implying

Well, technically they're correct as they're including target shooting and such which doesn't involve killing at all.

What about paintball guns?

Not all guns are design even to kill.

[Cletus]

Why were guns invented?

To launch projectiles at targets designated by the operator.

You can ask silly questions like that a hundred times, but the answer is never going to change.

[leekohler2]

Why not be as aggressive going after the human beings who actually do the maiming and murdering?

Umm...they were in this case.

BTW, are you saying the cops were wrong to bring this suit?

[Cletus]

Yeah, no more harmless than a tennis ball machine.

Come on. I own guns and I know full well what they and bullets are designed to do. You're being obtuse.

No, I am not.

I have made my living with guns for over 40 years. I have used just about every type and caliber of handheld, shoulder fired, and crew served firearm there is, and they all do exactly the same thing. It doesn't matter whether it a .22 caliber or 40mm. All they do is launch a projectile at a target designated by the operator.

What target the operator chooses is up to him.

[Chloe]

To launch projectiles at targets designated by the operator.

You can ask silly questions like that a hundred times, but the answer is never going to change.

Silly is skirting around the fact that guns are weapons and weapons are designed to injure or kill. If you shoot bottles on the weekend that's great and all but it's not the reason for that guns original creation and existence through history. It's like saying that a cannon was designed to be used at a football game's kickoff despite the fact that it's real reason for existence is for war. You're being difficult just to be difficult.

[Cletus]

Silly is skirting around the fact that guns are weapons and weapons are designed to injure or kill. If you shoot bottles on the weekend that's great and all but it's not the reason for that guns original creation and existence through history. It's like saying that a cannon was designed to be used at a football game's kickoff despite the fact that it's real reason for existence is for war. You're being difficult just to be difficult.

What I am being is right.

Are you aware that on average, over 80% of gunshot victims do not die? The average mortality rate for handgun shooting victims is 15 - 20%.

For high powered rifles (we are talking common hunting calibers... .308, .30-06, etc), it is 30 - 40%. The only common use firearm that has a higher than 50% mortality rate is a shotgun and it is about 70%.

"Assault rifles" or what the uninformed generally refer to as "assault rifles" actually have a mortality rate closer to that of handguns than larger caliber bolt guns.

If those tools are "designed to kill", their designers need to get back to the drawing board because they are not very efficient at it.

[Matty]

Silly is skirting around the fact that guns are weapons and weapons are designed to injure or kill. If you shoot bottles on the weekend that's great and all but it's not the reason for that guns original creation and existence through history. It's like saying that a cannon was designed to be used at a football game's kickoff despite the fact that it's real reason for existence is for war. You're being difficult just to be difficult.



I read an article that says the Chinese invented guns because they had invented gunpowder.

[Chris]

Silly is skirting around the fact that guns are weapons and weapons are designed to injure or kill. If you shoot bottles on the weekend that's great and all but it's not the reason for that guns original creation and existence through history. It's like saying that a cannon was designed to be used at a football game's kickoff despite the fact that it's real reason for existence is for war. You're being difficult just to be difficult.

How would you write a law that (a) protects non-aggressive use of guns in the right to self-defense but (b) prevents aggressive use of guns in murder and war?

[Chloe]

How would you write a law that (a) protects non-aggressive use of guns in the right to self-defense but (b) prevents aggressive use of guns in murder and war?

Doesnt that already exist?

[Chris]

Doesnt that already exist?

After the fact, sure, you go to court and are found innocent in self-defense cases and sentenced for murder if found guilty. But beforehand, only background checks on criminal/violent history prevent legal purchases.

[HoneyBadger]

You're against abortion but pro-gun-massacre of men, women, children and kindergartners ... and you don't even need tabs of acid to believe that.

Sad.

Pro-gun massacre? I must have missed that post. Could you kindly link back to it?

[Tahuyaman]

Umm...they were in this case.

BTW, are you saying the cops were wrong to bring this suit?

where did I say the police were wrong?

[Crepitus]

Why?
A gun is for poking holes in things at a distance. What else can you use it for?

[Crepitus]

No, I am not.

I have made my living with guns for over 40 years. I have used just about every type and caliber of handheld, shoulder fired, and crew served firearm there is, and they all do exactly the same thing. It doesn't matter whether it a .22 caliber or 40mm. All they do is launch a projectile at a target designated by the operator.

What target the operator chooses is up to him.
So, what did you use those guns for?

[Tahuyaman]

Pro-gun massacre? I must have missed that post. Could you kindly link back to it?


Exo is one of these people who thinks that if you oppose a gun control law, that automatically makes you a supporter of mass murder.

It's that way in everything with him and several others. If you support limiting welfare payments, you support forced starvation. If you oppose an environmental regulation, you are automatically for poisoning the air and water. If you oppose some whacky animal rights proposal, you advocate cruelty to animals.

[Crepitus]

Maybe it wouldn't if you knew more about guns.
I actually know quite a bit about guns Sir.

[BB-35]

Right, so they were designed to injure or kill (more likely to kill given the different scenarios). I don't know why people are so afraid to admit that point. It won't make them a sell out to their 2nd amendment friends. It just is what it is.


Humans are designed to kill,guns are only the tools they use.

[Cletus]

So, what did you use those guns for?

To launch projectiles toward whatever targets I designated.

[Cletus]

I actually know quite a bit about guns Sir.

I am sure you do. That is why you shouldn't let yourself get caught up in nonsensical rhetoric like "Guns are designed to kill". I was actually surprised you would buy into that.

[Chloe]

Humans are designed to kill,guns are only the tools they use.

Uhhh no

[Cletus]

Uhhh no

There is actually a lot of validity to his statement... certainly a lot more than that "guns are designed to kill" nonsense.

[Chris]

Uhhh no


But humans do choose to murder or not. Guns do not.

[Private Pickle]

Uhhh no

I will raise my hand on this one. Humans are the ULTIMATE predator. We are at the top of the food chain and have been for thousands of years. We are not stronger...we are not faster...we are smarter.

This has led us to amazing places Chloe. We now use that intelligence, not to remain at the top of the food chain rather to preserve it. We are a successful species and as such we are multiplying. But we are the only race to acknowledge our effect on other species and actually do something about it. Sure, there are dicks out there...we all know who they are (especially on this forum, I can't name names cause I'll get infracted but he knows who he is) but as a whole we are making amazing progress with our attention to the environment and conservation of the other life forms we share this planet with.

[Chloe]

There is actually a lot of validity to his statement... certainly a lot more than that "guns are designed to kill" nonsense.

Its like saying a bomb is not designed to kill it's just a tool for humans to kill with. Absolutely a bomb was designed to kill just as a sword was for centuries and so on. If you buy a rifle to hunt with you are buying something designed to kill the animal. If you buy a shotgun For your home you are buying something designed to kill an intruder. If a soldier is given a machine gun it is designed to kill the energy.

[Private Pickle]

There is actually a lot of validity to his statement... certainly a lot more than that "guns are designed to kill" nonsense.

Well in fairness guns are in fact designed to kill. Many shooters do practice target shooting or competitive shooting but that really isn't what the gun was designed to do.

“Abe Lincoln may have freed all men, but Sam Colt made them equal”

Sam Colt

[Private Pickle]

Its like saying a bomb is not designed to kill it's just a tool for humans to kill with. Absolutely a bomb was designed to kill just as a sword was for centuries and so on. If you buy a rifle to hunt with you are buying something designed to kill the animal. If you buy a shotgun For your home you are buying something designed to kill an intruder. If a soldier is given a machine gun it is designed to kill the energy.

Kill that energy with lots of bullets!

Just kidding. :)

Anyway, while I agree with you it has little to do with the point of intent.

[Chloe]

But humans do choose to murder or not. Guns do not.

You're talking about intent, I'm talking about design

[Chloe]

Legs are designed for waking. I can do a lot with my legs but the design is for forward motion not balancing a plate on my knee or something. A gun was designed by humans to kill animals for food and ultimately other people. Target shooting is just an activity to so with it when you aren't using it for it's constructed purpose

[Private Pickle]

You're talking about intent, I'm talking about design

Without intent you have no action. Without action the design is useless.

[Chloe]

Well in fairness guns are in fact designed to kill. Many shooters do practice target shooting or competitive shooting but that really isn't what the gun was designed to do.

“Abe Lincoln may have freed all men, but Sam Colt made them equal”

Sam Colt

Thank you that's all I'm trying to say

[Private Pickle]

Legs are designed for waking. I can do a lot with my legs but the design is for forward motion not balancing a plate on my knee or something. A gun was designed by humans to kill animals for food and ultimately other people. Target shooting is just an activity to so with it when you aren't using it for it's constructed purpose

*Insert joke about legs being hot here*

You have simply stated the history of guns. You haven't refuted their necessity.

[Private Pickle]

Thank you that's all I'm trying to say

Absolutely. No debating or arguing that at all.

[Chloe]

Without intent you have no action. Without action the design is useless.

You guys are getting way too philosophical about this. It's a gun, everybody here knows what a gun is meant to do.

[Chloe]

Absolutely. No debating or arguing that at all.

Tell that to others here that seem to believe otherwise

[Common Sense]

Its like saying a bomb is not designed to kill it's just a tool for humans to kill with. Absolutely a bomb was designed to kill just as a sword was for centuries and so on. If you buy a rifle to hunt with you are buying something designed to kill the animal. If you buy a shotgun For your home you are buying something designed to kill an intruder. If a soldier is given a machine gun it is designed to kill the energy.

A bomb isn't designed to kill. It's just designed to project force and projectiles in every direction. Clearly it's just a "tool".

;)

[Private Pickle]

You guys are getting way too philosophical about this. It's a gun, everybody here knows what a gun is meant to do.

Sure but there is a reason humans designed the gun...the sword...the bow and arrow...

You can't simply write that off.

[Private Pickle]

A bomb isn't designed to kill. It's just designed to project force and projectiles in every direction. Clearly it's just a "tool".

;)

By killing.... Come on man....

[Private Pickle]

Tell that to others here that seem to believe otherwise

I am.

[Chloe]

*Insert joke about legs being hot here*

You have simply stated the history of guns. You haven't refuted their necessity.

Yes even my legs can distract a guy and make him lose IQ points but that's still not their design. I'm not arguing the necessity of guns. I'm just trying to understand why people seem to think they were designed for something other than to kill.

[Private Pickle]

Yes even my legs can distract a guy and make him lose IQ points but that's still not their design. I'm not arguing the necessity of guns. I'm just trying to understand why people seem to think they were designed for something other than to kill.

You have nice legs. Blame Yahweh!

They weren't designed for something other than to kill. We all know this. Arguing this is a simple distraction and nothing more. Don't get caught up in it!

[zelmo1234]

Well they obviously aren't designed to tickle and they clearly aren't designed to heal someone or something. Hunting rifles are designed to kill animals, guns for military are designed to kill enemies, so people, and home defense guns are designed to obviously injure or kill someone else if used. A bullet is meant to penetrate a target and in turn harm or kill. What else would a gun be designed for other than to injure or kill? I'm sure you could use it for fun but the ultimate design is to inflict injury and/or kill.

Well the top ones are custom Trap guns designed for shooting clay disc flying away from you in different directions.

The pistol is a target 22 competition gun that is used in some of the Olympic shooting sports

And that evil looking one is one of the target masters used in the cross country skiing triathlon

Would you like to correct your statement now that you know? or are all guns still designed to kill things.

OH and by the way here is one that you pot is a victimless crime and you need a gun to kill people might like?

http://www.onenewspage.us/video/20151010/3415523/Michigan-Man-Who-Shot-Police-With-Crossbow-Killed.htm

this idiot stabbed his neighbor in the arm with a pitch fork because he was sure he stole his pot plants.

When the police cam to arrest him he shot a State Police officer with a Cross bow, slicing through his vest like it was butter.

Should we ban pitch forks? Or what about crossbows they are designed to kill things too

[zelmo1234]

Why were guns invented?

To protect people from other people? They were designed so the village next to you could not come in and take all of your stuff and rape the village women

[zelmo1234]

Right, so they were designed to injure or kill (more likely to kill given the different scenarios). I don't know why people are so afraid to admit that point. It won't make them a sell out to their 2nd amendment friends. It just is what it is.

OK what was the second amendment designed for? What does it protect against?

[zelmo1234]

Silly is skirting around the fact that guns are weapons and weapons are designed to injure or kill. If you shoot bottles on the weekend that's great and all but it's not the reason for that guns original creation and existence through history. It's like saying that a cannon was designed to be used at a football game's kickoff despite the fact that it's real reason for existence is for war. You're being difficult just to be difficult.

No they were designed for protection, but then most on the left are more concerned about the criminal than the victim anyway.

[Common Sense]

Well the top ones are custom Trap guns designed for shooting clay disc flying away from you in different directions.

The pistol is a target 22 competition gun that is used in some of the Olympic shooting sports

And that evil looking one is one of the target masters used in the cross country skiing triathlon

Would you like to correct your statement now that you know? or are all guns still designed to kill things.

OH and by the way here is one that you pot is a victimless crime and you need a gun to kill people might like?

http://www.onenewspage.us/video/20151010/3415523/Michigan-Man-Who-Shot-Police-With-Crossbow-Killed.htm

this idiot stabbed his neighbor in the arm with a pitch fork because he was sure he stole his pot plants.

When the police cam to arrest him he shot a State Police officer with a Cross bow, slicing through his vest like it was butter.

Should we ban pitch forks? Or what about crossbows they are designed to kill things too

We both know that the vast majority of guns aren't the sporting guns you posted in an obvious attempt to deceive.

Of course there are target guns and .22's that are made specifically to shoot targets and small game, but if those guns serve a specific purpose, what specific purpose does my 1911 serve? What about my AR-15?

[Crepitus]

To launch projectiles toward whatever targets I designated.
You are weaseling. What was the purpose of launching projectiles towards the targets of your choice? What targets did you choose?

[zelmo1234]

Uhhh no

Ah! Yes, Humans were killing each other in masses long before the gun was invented. What happen then were rocks invented to kill people

[Peter1469]

I don't know but Exo needs work in the oral hygiene department. That tongue looks cruddy.

And an LDS tab.

[Common Sense]

I guess a sword is just a fancy letter opener.

[Crepitus]

Well in fairness guns are in fact designed to kill. Many shooters do practice target shooting or competitive shooting but that really isn't what the gun was designed to do.

“Abe Lincoln may have freed all men, but Sam Colt made them equal”

Sam Colt
This is what I have been getting at.

Guns were not designed for shooting paper targets, pop-ups, beer cans, tannerite, or anything else you may have shot them at.

They were designed to kill things, whether they be animals, enemy soldiers, home intruders, or unfortunately the spouse who cheated on you.

In short, they were not designed for murder, but they can be used that way.

[Chris]

This is what I have been getting at.

Guns were not designed for shooting paper targets, pop-ups, beer cans, tannerite, or anything else you may have shot them at.

They were designed to kill things, whether they be animals, enemy soldiers, home intruders, or unfortunately the spouse who cheated on you.

In short, they were not designed for murder, but they can be used that way.

Right, and that choice, to kill, or to murder, is, obviously, the human's.

[Crepitus]

Well the top ones are custom Trap guns designed for shooting clay disc flying away from you in different directions.

The pistol is a target 22 competition gun that is used in some of the Olympic shooting sports

And that evil looking one is one of the target masters used in the cross country skiing triathlon

Would you like to correct your statement now that you know? or are all guns still designed to kill things.

OH and by the way here is one that you pot is a victimless crime and you need a gun to kill people might like?

http://www.onenewspage.us/video/20151010/3415523/Michigan-Man-Who-Shot-Police-With-Crossbow-Killed.htm

this idiot stabbed his neighbor in the arm with a pitch fork because he was sure he stole his pot plants.

When the police cam to arrest him he shot a State Police officer with a Cross bow, slicing through his vest like it was butter.

Should we ban pitch forks? Or what about crossbows they are designed to kill things too
I belive we are talking about the basic design, starting with a muzzle loading musket or even before, not all the variants that have developed since then.

[Crepitus]

Right, and that choice, to kill, or to murder, is, obviously, the human's.
Well of course, I never said anything different. But saying guns aren't designed to kill things is just silly.

[Private Pickle]

This is what I have been getting at.

Guns were not designed for shooting paper targets, pop-ups, beer cans, tannerite, or anything else you may have shot them at.

They were designed to kill things, whether they be animals, enemy soldiers, home intruders, or unfortunately the spouse who cheated on you.

In short, they were not designed for murder, but they can be used that way.

Correct.

There are laws against murder, brandishing a firearm, discharging a firearm, menacing etc...

[Captain Obvious]

I guess a sword is just a fancy letter opener.

It's whatever the user uses it as.

I bet they cut up pumpkins nifty too.

[zelmo1234]

We both know that the vast majority of guns aren't the sporting guns you posted in an obvious attempt to deceive.

Of course there are target guns and .22's that are made specifically to shoot targets and small game, but if those guns serve a specific purpose, what specific purpose does my 1911 serve? What about my AR-15?

Well the `1911 is still and has been for a century the number one frame used by competition shooters. It is not used in a lot of shootings though it likely to have stopped many. It has a very calming effect in the cocked and locked position And the AR is just a style of gun three gun tournaments come to mind they are a bllast.

[zelmo1234]

This is what I have been getting at.

Guns were not designed for shooting paper targets, pop-ups, beer cans, tannerite, or anything else you may have shot them at.

They were designed to kill things, whether they be animals, enemy soldiers, home intruders, or unfortunately the spouse who cheated on you.

In short, they were not designed for murder, but they can be used that way.

No they were designed to protect people form intruders and invaders. but who is counting

[nathanbforrest45]

no, in their mind the actual criminal is a victim too.



​free mumia

[Tahuyaman]

​free mumia



Actually, that is a good example. Here is a murderer whom the far left loves because of who he murdered.

[Crepitus]

No they were designed to protect people from intruders and invaders. but who is counting
And how do they protect people from intruders and invaders?

[Common Sense]

It's whatever the user uses it as.

I bet they cut up pumpkins nifty too.

Yeah, they weren't made to fight or kill people. It was just a coincidence.

[Tahuyaman]

And how do they protect people from intruders and invaders?

the same way they do bad things.

[Captain Obvious]

Yeah, they weren't made to fight or kill people. It was just a coincidence.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wFia8-G1Ss8/UUp0IBjP_6I/AAAAAAAAQRY/fx-3I3xgxaM/s1600/46815_162080027274197_1273326978_n.jpg

[Crepitus]

the same way they do bad things.
Which is?

[nathanbforrest45]

`
`
Worth noting; "Badger Guns and Badger Outdoors were top sellers of crime guns recovered in Milwaukee for more than a decade. In 2005, Badger Outdoors was the top seller of crime guns in the nation with 537 such weapons recovered." - source (http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/jury-finds-for-wounded-officers-in-badger-guns-lawsuit-b99596217z1-332567372.html)


What caliber is a 'crime gun"? Is it a revolver or an automatic? Nickle Plated or gun metal in color? Is there a special location in the store for "crime guns"

[Common Sense]

So if I'm reading all of this bullshit right, guns aren't weapons. They're just tools.

I'm seeing tools, that's for sure.

[Peter1469]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by BB-35 http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1290884#post1290884)
Humans are designed to kill,guns are only the tools they use.


Uhhh no

Uhh yes. Prior to decent guns, most forms of self defense took a lot of practice and dedication to be good at it. An average man would not stand a chance against a trained knight 600 years ago.

The 1871 Colt Peacemaker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Model_1871-72_Open_Top) opened self defense to all. Samuel Colt may even have said "God made man; I made man equal."

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ca/Colt_44_Open_Top.JPG/300px-Colt_44_Open_Top.JPG

Here is an example of how guns even the odds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YyBtMxZgQs

[Captain Obvious]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by BB-35 http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1290884#post1290884)
Humans are designed to kill,guns are only the tools they use.



Uhh yes. Prior to decent guns, most forms of self defense took a lot of practice and dedication to be good at it. An average man would not stand a chance against a trained knight 600 years ago.

The 1871 Colt Peacemaker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Model_1871-72_Open_Top) opened self defense to all. Samuel Colt may even have said "God made man; I made man equal."

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ca/Colt_44_Open_Top.JPG/300px-Colt_44_Open_Top.JPG

Ironically, the left supports the "protected class" ideology - except in terms of self-defense.

[Captain Obvious]

So if I'm reading all of this bullshit right, guns aren't weapons. They're just tools.

I'm seeing tools, that's for sure.

Correct

[exotix]

What caliber is a 'crime gun"?

Is it a revolver or an automatic? Nickle Plated or gun metal in color? Is there a special location in the store for "crime guns"
Good point ... say for instance, according to winggunnuts ... this would be the same as a fatal car accident.


http://truthuncensored.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/article-2734769-20D7D89000000578-475_964x406.jpg

[Chloe]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by BB-35 http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1290884#post1290884)
Humans are designed to kill,guns are only the tools they use.



Uhh yes. Prior to decent guns, most forms of self defense took a lot of practice and dedication to be good at it. An average man would not stand a chance against a trained knight 600 years ago.

The 1871 Colt Peacemaker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Model_1871-72_Open_Top) opened self defense to all. Samuel Colt may even have said "God made man; I made man equal."

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ca/Colt_44_Open_Top.JPG/300px-Colt_44_Open_Top.JPG

Here is an example of how guns even the odds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YyBtMxZgQs

Again though you guys are talking about intent and usage im talking about design. A gun, just like any weapon, is designed to injure or kill. Acknowledging that simple fact won't change your politics or your gun interest. Why is there such a fear to accept that guns are designed to injure or kill someone or something else? You don't have to use them that way, you can shoot pineapples if you want, but that doesn't change what the physical gun is designed to do to whatever it's used against.

[Common Sense]

Correct

So a gun is not a weapon?

I think you may have forgotten something in your move. ;)

[Tahuyaman]

Which is?


People.

[Peter1469]

Good point ... say for instance, according to winggunnuts ... this would be the same as a fatal car accident.

He should have been behind her, or to her right rear. That weapon pulls up and left.

He was an idiot.

[Chris]

Again though you guys are talking about intent and usage im talking about design. A gun, just like any weapon, is designed to injure or kill. Acknowledging that simple fact won't change your politics or your gun interest. Why is there such a fear to accept that guns are designed to injure or kill someone or something else? You don't have to use them that way, you can shoot pineapples if you want, but that doesn't change what the physical gun is designed to do to whatever it's used against.

Then what's your point? Say, ignoring stopping injury or killing, that a gun is designed to injure or kill, what is the implication of that?

[Peter1469]

Don't accuse me of claiming that guns are not intended to kill.

I am more impressed when people get creative and use items not made to kill, kill.

My point is that guns give the weak a chance to live when nothing else can.


Again though you guys are talking about intent and usage im talking about design. A gun, just like any weapon, is designed to injure or kill. Acknowledging that simple fact won't change your politics or your gun interest. Why is there such a fear to accept that guns are designed to injure or kill someone or something else? You don't have to use them that way, you can shoot pineapples if you want, but that doesn't change what the physical gun is designed to do to whatever it's used against.

[Chloe]

A soup spoon is designed to eat soup with but you can also use it to play music or balance on your nose. A hammer is designed to drive nails into a structure but you can also use it to break things with or even hurt people, but that's not what it's designed for. An oven mitt is designed to take hot trays or dishes out of an oven but you can also use it as a hand puppet, a pillow for your head, to protect your face from being scratched by your fingernails but it's designed to take things out of the oven.

a gun is designed to send a bullet into something that is alive resulting in injury or death. You can use the gun to celebrate the new year, to blow up milk jugs, to compete with in the Olympics or to smoke pot out of (no I have not ever done that), but none of that changes what it's truly originally and most commonly designed to do which is to injure or kill.

[nathanbforrest45]

And how do they protect people from intruders and invaders?

I did it once by merely chambering a round in my pump action shotgun.

[exotix]

He should have been behind her, or to her right rear. That weapon pulls up and left.

He was an idiot.Yes, an adult would never think of letting a 9 year-old get behind the wheel ... but no problem giving her a full-auto Uzi.

[Matty]

A soup spoon is designed to eat soup with but you can also use it to play music or balance on your nose. A hammer is designed to drive nails into a structure but you can also use it to break things with or even hurt people, but that's not what it's designed for. An oven mitt is designed to take hot trays or dishes out of an oven but you can also use it as a hand puppet, a pillow for your head, to protect your face from being scratched by your fingernails but it's designed to take things out of the oven.

a gun is designed to send a bullet into something that is alive resulting in injury or death. You can use the gun to celebrate the new year, to blow up milk jugs, to compete with in the Olympics or to smoke pot out of (no I have not ever done that), but none of that changes what it's truly originally and most commonly designed to do which is to injure or kill.



There are many documented hammer murders.

[Chris]

A soup spoon is designed to eat soup with but you can also use it to play music or balance on your nose. A hammer is designed to drive nails into a structure but you can also use it to break things with or even hurt people, but that's not what it's designed for. An oven mitt is designed to take hot trays or dishes out of an oven but you can also use it as a hand puppet, a pillow for your head, to protect your face from being scratched by your fingernails but it's designed to take things out of the oven.

a gun is designed to send a bullet into something that is alive resulting in injury or death. You can use the gun to celebrate the new year, to blow up milk jugs, to compete with in the Olympics or to smoke pot out of (no I have not ever done that), but none of that changes what it's truly originally and most commonly designed to do which is to injure or kill.



OK, and your point relevant to the right to bear arms?

[Chloe]

There are many documented hammer murders.

Ok?

[Chloe]

OK, and your point relevant to the right to bear arms?

I wasn't ever trying to make a point about the right to bear arms. My whole argument has only been what guns are designed to do

[Peter1469]

A soup spoon is designed to eat soup with but you can also use it to play music or balance on your nose. A hammer is designed to drive nails into a structure but you can also use it to break things with or even hurt people, but that's not what it's designed for. An oven mitt is designed to take hot trays or dishes out of an oven but you can also use it as a hand puppet, a pillow for your head, to protect your face from being scratched by your fingernails but it's designed to take things out of the oven.

a gun is designed to send a bullet into something that is alive resulting in injury or death. You can use the gun to celebrate the new year, to blow up milk jugs, to compete with in the Olympics or to smoke pot out of (no I have not ever done that), but none of that changes what it's truly originally and most commonly designed to do which is to injure or kill.

So. What is the point?

Without guns the weak would be victims.

[Common Sense]

So. What is the point?

Without guns the weak would be victims.

The point is, obtuse individuals are trying to imply that guns aren't weapons. That has been the argument.

[Chloe]

So. What is the point?

Without guns the weak would be victims.

That implies you are weak unless you have a gun which is not true.

[Peter1469]

The point is, obtuse individuals are trying to imply that guns aren't weapons. That has been the argument.

Never mine.

[Common Sense]

Never mine.

I know. Just pointing out the ridiculous argument that has been on going.

[Chris]

Yes, Chloe...

http://i.snag.gy/i20PL.jpg

[Private Pickle]

That implies you are weak unless you have a gun which is not true.

Do I need to quote Sam Colt again? You agreed with me earlier.

[Private Pickle]

Never mine.

Never "mind".

[HoneyBadger]

Guns were not designed for shooting paper targets, pop-ups, beer cans, tannerite, or anything else you may have shot them at.

I've a Ruger target pistol that would beg to differ with you.....


They were designed to kill things, whether they be animals, enemy soldiers, home intruders, or unfortunately the spouse who cheated on you.

In short, they were not designed for murder, but they can be used that way.

As someone said earlier, they are designed to send a projectile away from you at a high rate of speed. When aimed at a human or animal, the purpose of the projectile is to stop that human or animal either permanently, or temporarily.

[HoneyBadger]

Exo is one of these people who thinks that if you oppose a gun control law, that automatically makes you a supporter of mass murder.

It's that way in everything with him and several others. If you support limiting welfare payments, you support forced starvation. If you oppose an environmental regulation, you are automatically for poisoning the air and water. If you oppose some whacky animal rights proposal, you advocate cruelty to animals.

In other words, he isn't exactly a deep thinker.

[Private Pickle]

Yes, Chloe...

http://i.snag.gy/i20PL.jpg

That guns are and were designed to kill.

With that being said, there is nothing beyond that to discuss apparently.

[Private Pickle]

In other words, he isn't exactly a deep thinker.

Correct.

[Matty]

That implies you are weak unless you have a gun which is not true.



Well you are if the other guy has a gun and you don't.

[Tahuyaman]

In other words, he isn't exactly a deep thinker.

Well, he's not a thinker, period.

[Tahuyaman]

Never mine.


When you think about it, that's the only appropriate response. And I'm sure she doesn't get that either.

[Crepitus]

And how do they protect people from intruders and invaders?


the same way they do bad things.


Which is?


People.


Clarify please.

[Crepitus]

I did it once by merely chambering a round in my pump action shotgun.
And why would that stop someone?

[Crepitus]

I've a Ruger target pistol that would beg to differ with you.....

Target shooting came later. Nobody designed the original gun thinking "wow this will be fun to practice shooting at targets with".




As someone said earlier, they are designed to send a projectile away from you at a high rate of speed. When aimed at a human or animal, the purpose of the projectile is to stop that human or animal either permanently, or temporarily.
Ah Ha!

[Bob]

Now legal precedence for every family who's loved ones were maimed and murdered by guns.

This will be appealed. Next, only if some clerk sells a gun to some straw man buyer.

[Chris]

Target shooting came later. Nobody designed the original gun thinking "wow this will be fun to practice shooting at targets with".




Ah Ha!


http://i.snag.gy/i20PL.jpg

[Crepitus]

Good point ... say for instance, according to winggunnuts ... this would be the same as a fatal car accident.


http://truthuncensored.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/article-2734769-20D7D89000000578-475_964x406.jpg
That actually is the same as a fatal car accident. There was no intent.

[Bob]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Chloe http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1291041#post1291041)
That implies you are weak unless you have a gun which is not true.


Well you are if the other guy has a gun and you don't.

LMAO Quite correct.

We want to carry our gun to stop the criminal who has his gun. Quite simple. Show it to them and see if they run like chickens.

[Crepitus]

So. What is the point?

Without guns the weak would be victims.
Right! With guns "the weak" can create their own victims!

[zelmo1234]

Ironically, the left supports the "protected class" ideology - except in terms of self-defense.

Well you know it is the fault of society that criminals are the way that they are. And if you are able to defend yourself, then that is not fair. The left would much rather the criminal kill the innocent than the other way around

[Crepitus]

http://i.snag.gy/i20PL.jpg
You already understand the point.

[zelmo1234]

Good point ... say for instance, according to winggunnuts ... this would be the same as a fatal car accident.


http://truthuncensored.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/article-2734769-20D7D89000000578-475_964x406.jpg

Now exotix, every good liberal knows that you are twice as dead if you are killed with a gun, If you don't watch yourself, they are going to kick you out of the club

[Captain Obvious]

Right! With guns "the weak" can create their own victims!

You can substitute virtually anything for "guns" and that statement would still be true.

With guns the law abiding can effectively protect themselves and their rights.

[Chris]

You already understand the point.

In terms of our right to keep and bears arms, no, I do not.

[Crepitus]

You can substitute virtually anything for "guns" and that statement would still be true.

With guns the law abiding can effectively protect themselves and their rights.
I agree, I just have a problem with the single minded obsessiveness of some of the people here.

It's not black or white, they can be used and misused. Guns are a double edged sword, not an absolute good.

[Crepitus]

In terms of our right to keep and bears arms, no, I do not.
see post #209

[exotix]

That actually is the same as a fatal car accident. There was no intent.
Now exotix, every good liberal knows that you are twice as dead if you are killed with a gun, If you don't watch yourself, they are going to kick you out of the club
Yes, an adult would never think of letting a 9 year-old get behind the wheel ... but no problem giving her a full-auto Uzi.

[Bob]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Chloe http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1291029#post1291029)
A soup spoon is designed to eat soup with but you can also use it to play music or balance on your nose. A hammer is designed to drive nails into a structure but you can also use it to break things with or even hurt people, but that's not what it's designed for. An oven mitt is designed to take hot trays or dishes out of an oven but you can also use it as a hand puppet, a pillow for your head, to protect your face from being scratched by your fingernails but it's designed to take things out of the oven.

a gun is designed to send a bullet into something that is alive resulting in injury or death. You can use the gun to celebrate the new year, to blow up milk jugs, to compete with in the Olympics or to smoke pot out of (no I have not ever done that), but none of that changes what it's truly originally and most commonly designed to do which is to injure or kill.


OKay, you are someplace with your oven mitt. A person intending to kill you points his gun at your face but you too have a gun on the other hand.

Do you point the mitt at him or the gun?

[Peter1469]

Right! With guns "the weak" can create their own victims!

Criminals will do that no matter what laws you think up.

[Captain Obvious]

Yes, an adult would never think of letting a 9 year-old get behind the wheel ... but no problem giving her a full-auto Uzi.

Cognitive error

[Bob]

Yes, an adult would never think of letting a 9 year-old get behind the wheel ... but no problem giving her a full-auto Uzi.

Having fired a variety of automatic weapons, never in my wildest day would I let some small kid fire a machine gun.

You saw what happened when the gun fired bullets at his head.

[Chris]

see post #209

Nevermind.

[zelmo1234]

Again though you guys are talking about intent and usage im talking about design. A gun, just like any weapon, is designed to injure or kill. Acknowledging that simple fact won't change your politics or your gun interest. Why is there such a fear to accept that guns are designed to injure or kill someone or something else? You don't have to use them that way, you can shoot pineapples if you want, but that doesn't change what the physical gun is designed to do to whatever it's used against.

It would not hurt the liberals to acknowledge that an unborn child is a Human baby either. but they don't

But using your logic Cars have safety equipment on them, therefore, we can assume that they are intended to be dangerous. Cigarettes have warning labels on them they must be made to kill people. What about knives they were designed to cut meat, therefore they were weapons of death and destruction as well

The truth is a gun was not designed to kill, but it can be used to do so. the pictures that I posted are guns specifically designed for other purposes, but you will never admint it.

So here is what you are looking for and it is dishonest. You want people to say yes guns are built and sold for the sole purpose of killing and then you can take that and use it as a weapon by saying that even gun supports agree that they are no other purpose for guns other that killing people.

you side will do this because the build a lot of their ideology on lies and deception. So they would like nothing more than to have someone on the right agree with their opinion which simply is not true.

[Crepitus]

Yes, an adult would never think of letting a 9 year-old get behind the wheel ... but no problem giving her a full-auto Uzi.


Here, Let me google that for you (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=9+year+old+driving).

[Crepitus]

Criminals will do that no matter what laws you think up.
Yup, but you are the one who keeps quoting Sam Colt.

[Captain Obvious]

Here, Let me google that for you (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=9+year+old+driving).

http://www.couponclipinista.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Instant-Win-Giveaway1.jpg

[Bob]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Chloe http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1291016#post1291016)
Again though you guys are talking about intent and usage im talking about design. A gun, just like any weapon, is designed to injure or kill. Acknowledging that simple fact won't change your politics or your gun interest. Why is there such a fear to accept that guns are designed to injure or kill someone or something else? You don't have to use them that way, you can shoot pineapples if you want, but that doesn't change what the physical gun is designed to do to whatever it's used against.


Take my case @Chloe (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=565).

I was drafted into the Army. There I was handed an M1-Garand and told I would learn to shoot it. I was already a good shot and indeed had previously fired Army weapons in high school.

They trained me to be a very good killer.

Now, you may think this is silly, but why did the army train me to be a killer and yet never put in front of me a live human being?

Was their training a waste since I did not kill any humans?

[zelmo1234]

A soup spoon is designed to eat soup with but you can also use it to play music or balance on your nose. A hammer is designed to drive nails into a structure but you can also use it to break things with or even hurt people, but that's not what it's designed for. An oven mitt is designed to take hot trays or dishes out of an oven but you can also use it as a hand puppet, a pillow for your head, to protect your face from being scratched by your fingernails but it's designed to take things out of the oven.

But this is not true only a small fraction of ammunition is used to kill something, even if you include hunting, and what they punch holes in is actually paper most of the time.

But what it was designed for is to keep you safe, and the policies that the left supports takes that ability from those that would not use a gun to kill and actually puts it is the hands of those that are criminal and only want to use it to kill.

a gun is designed to send a bullet into something that is alive resulting in injury or death. You can use the gun to celebrate the new year, to blow up milk jugs, to compete with in the Olympics or to smoke pot out of (no I have not ever done that), but none of that changes what it's truly originally and most commonly designed to do which is to injure or kill. 123

Most people that hate guns actually fear them, and once they find out what they actually do? They generally have a much different view. I can load all my guns and in a 1000 years they will never harm anyone with out the help of a human.

So look at it this way When people decide to kill people a person is involved 100% of the time but a gun is only involved part of the time.

So ban people instead and you will have much better results.

The same can be said for the 2nd amendment, we constantly here the left tell us that it was written so that people could hunt and enjoy the shooting sports. NOTHING could be further from the truth.

It was written so the people could protect themselves, if needed from foreign invaders, but mostly it was designed to keep the government from becoming a tyranny, like we are heading for today.

[zelmo1234]

Yes, an adult would never think of letting a 9 year-old get behind the wheel ... but no problem giving her a full-auto Uzi.

You live in Alabama right? I promise you that on most farms there are 9 years old moving trucks around the farm and driving tractors where they are needed.

[zelmo1234]

There are many documented hammer murders.

It was also invented as a weapon, and other uses came from that.

[zelmo1234]

I wasn't ever trying to make a point about the right to bear arms. My whole argument has only been what guns are designed to do

But you conclusion is wrong.

[zelmo1234]

So. What is the point?

Without guns the weak would be victims.

Well as long as no criminals were injured, they are likely ok with that

[Crepitus]

It was also invented as a weapon, and other uses came from that.


But you conclusion is wrong.


Wait, Hammers were designed to be weapons but guns were not? :shocked:

[zelmo1234]

I know. Just pointing out the ridiculous argument that has been on going.

So because of my training? are my hands and feet, elbows and knees now weapons. the training has taught me how to use them as such?

Because of that should I have to register? or have my arms and legs removed because they can hurt someone.

[zelmo1234]

That guns are and were designed to kill.

With that being said, there is nothing beyond that to discuss apparently.

But of course that is a wrong assumption.

[zelmo1234]

And why would that stop someone?

Because every one in the world knows what that sound is, and they also know that even if they are armed it is now a fair fight and criminals are NEVER interested in a fair fight.

[zelmo1234]

Target shooting came later. Nobody designed the original gun thinking "wow this will be fun to practice shooting at targets with".

Ah Ha!

Actually if you are talking about the modern gun, you would be wrong again, many of guns were used for recreation by the royal families of the world long before the production capacity provided the ability to outfit armies.

This is the problem with the left, they don't know what they are talking about.

[Crepitus]

Because every one in the world knows what that sound is, and they also know that even if they are armed it is now a fair fight and criminals are NEVER interested in a fair fight.
Because the gun is a device for killing things, so it is frightening.

[zelmo1234]

Right! With guns "the weak" can create their own victims!

Yes and they might be able to stay alive. Now that would mean that sometimes violent criminals are injured or killed and we all know that or liberal friends morn for the criminal element.

So a few of your criminal friends will meet there end at the hands of an innocent that is weaker. But those are the breaks.

[exotix]

You live in Alabama right? I promise you that on most farms there are 9 years old moving trucks around the farm and driving tractors where they are needed.
Delude yourself dude ... you do it well ... LOL

[zelmo1234]

Yes, an adult would never think of letting a 9 year-old get behind the wheel ... but no problem giving her a full-auto Uzi.

Wrong and of course you know this. But that is what liberals do.

[Captain Obvious]

I agree, I just have a problem with the single minded obsessiveness of some of the people here.

It's not black or white, they can be used and misused. Guns are a double edged sword, not an absolute good.

That's a fair point and as a staunch gun rights guy I'll always criticize the Ted Nugents of the world because I think they give responsible gun owners a bad name.

[Crepitus]

That's a fair point and as a staunch gun rights guy I'll always criticize the Ted Nugents of the world because I think they give responsible gun owners a bad name.
But they just don't get it.

[Captain Obvious]

But they just don't get it.

It's "cool" to be a gun nut, I think that's part of the phenomenon.

Responsible gun owners aren't out there to be posers.

[zelmo1234]

Wait, Hammers were designed to be weapons but guns were not? :shocked:

I said that they were created as weapons and then other used came from that?

I would say that you could make the case for guns that they were created as weapons and now there are many other uses.

as with the hammer, the major use of a gun is no longer a weapon but the other uses. Both can still be used as a weapon. but most of the time they are not.

[Captain Obvious]

Wait, Hammers were designed to be weapons but guns were not? :shocked:

If guns didn't exist, hell yeah, hammers would be (and were, before guns) designed to be weapons.

The "ban hammer" isn't a meme because it implies that nails are being hammered.

[Peter1469]

Yup, but you are the one who keeps quoting Sam Colt.

You are mixing up your thought processes. The two are separate sub-topics.

[zelmo1234]

Because the gun is a device for killing things, so it is frightening.

Or the gun is a device of protecting things and criminals flee from a persons with the ability to protect themselves.

Yes, I understand that you morn for the criminal. we get it.

[Common]

That's a fair point and as a staunch gun rights guy I'll always criticize the Ted Nugents of the world because I think they give responsible gun owners a bad name.

As a gun rights proponent I absolutely agree and Ill go further, the clowns that walk around with AR15s and assault rifles over their shoulders in public give gun owners a bad name. Anyone half ass trained to carry a sidearm could put a group in their chest before they got that rifle off their shoulder.

[zelmo1234]

Delude yourself dude ... you do it well ... LOL

So we have one death by automatic weapon

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=9+year+old+steals+car&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=C45EBC791D0813FE229DC45EBC791D0813FE229D

But 9 year olds never get behind the wheel or maybe they do

So now that you have kept your record of being wrong. What do we do now.

[zelmo1234]

As a gun rights proponent I absolutely agree and Ill go further, the clowns that walk around with AR15s and assault rifles over their shoulders in public give gun owners a bad name. Anyone half ass trained to carry a sidearm could put a group in their chest before they got that rifle off their shoulder.

That depends on the level of training and the type of sling that the carrier is using. with the proper training and a concealed side arm? My money is not the long gun.

[Captain Obvious]

As a gun rights proponent I absolutely agree and Ill go further, the clowns that walk around with AR15s and assault rifles over their shoulders in public give gun owners a bad name. Anyone half ass trained to carry a sidearm could put a group in their chest before they got that rifle off their shoulder.

I totally agree with that, I've ranted on that here with similar videos when they were posted, trashed these guys for doing that shit.

Walk softly, carry a sidearm.

[Common]

That depends on the level of training and the type of sling that the carrier is using. with the proper training and a concealed side arm? My money is not the long gun.

Im talking about the tards you see on tv with the rifles slung cross shouldered across their back. They are MEAT and nothing more.

[Crepitus]

I said that they were created as weapons and then other used came from that?

I would say that you could make the case for guns that they were created as weapons and now there are many other uses.

as with the hammer, the major use of a gun is no longer a weapon but the other uses. Both can still be used as a weapon. but most of the time they are not.
What other uses have supplanted "weapon"?

[zelmo1234]

What other uses have supplanted "weapon"?

recreational shooting? that would be the #1 reason that guns are owned.

[Crepitus]

Or the gun is a device of protecting things and criminals flee from a persons with the ability to protect themselves.

Yes, I understand that you morn for the criminal. we get it.
I do not mourn for criminals, I mourn for common sense when certain subjects come up.