or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Take all of the guns. All of them.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Take all of the guns. All of them. - Page 103

post #1531 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel View Post

However, all this was over 30 years ago, when I was a good deal younger and tougher!

You don't need help sitting down?
post #1532 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickCarraway View Post

Roger Ayscue, a 24-year veteran of the Army and a manager at Hyatt Guns in Charlotte explains the difference in military assault weapons and the rifles available to the public today.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/article83978652.html

That guy was checking out my AR when we were in Charlotte last year. The store is huge. Their gunsmith did the restoration of this:

http://www.styleforum.net/t/41953/gun-appreciation-thread/3570#post_8370355
post #1533 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLMountainMan View Post

Clearly, this Paris-style attack could have easily been prevented with Paris-style gun control.

Well lone wolf type attack like Orlando would be much harder, this guy could possibly be stopped or attack with handgun/knife and he wouldnt have killed 50 people probably. Problem with Paris was that it was whole network of people with resources. European gun laws are superior, no fault in admitting the obvious.
post #1534 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post

Well lone wolf type attack like Orlando would be much harder, this guy could possibly be stopped or attack with handgun/knife and he wouldnt have killed 50 people probably. Problem with Paris was that it was whole network of people with resources. European gun laws are superior, no fault in admitting the obvious.

He was basically unchallenged inside that club for what, three hours? A Glock 17 could have done the same amount of damage. Shotguns kill more people than rifles. When you're shooting at unarmed people at close range who are trapped in a confined space, whether you use a handgun (like a G17) or rifle becomes completely irrelevant. The difference between those two weapons under such conditions is essentially zero.
post #1535 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited 
He was basically unchallenged inside that club for what, 3 hours?

Has there been an explanation for why it took so long for SWAT to respond and get in?


The club had an armed security officer, but I can't find much information on what he was doing during the shooting. Did he get shot?
post #1536 of 1722
So, just to get this straight, an assault weapon is a rifle which has either full auto or burst mode fire selection.

However the previous ban lumped in any rifles which meet the criteria of a detachable box magazine plus any two of the features as:

- Folding or telescoping stock
- Pistol grip
- Bayonet lug
- Flash suppressor

Any rifles which exceed the aforementioned restrictions seem to be thrown into the assualt weapon category, despite not actually being an "assault weapon".

Did I get that right?
post #1537 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post


Has there been an explanation for why it took so long for SWAT to respond and get in?


The club had an armed security officer, but I can't find much information on what he was doing during the shooting. Did he get shot?



I read an article that he returned fire, but was unable to hit the guy.  Then I guess he fell back?  I don't know.

post #1538 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post

European gun laws are superior, no fault in admitting the obvious.

Yeah, superior if you want to be a defenseless loser-bum who can't think for himself. Fortunately, that's not what we want to be here in America.

Fucking foreign trash.
post #1539 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteslashasian View Post

So, just to get this straight, an assault weapon is a rifle which has either full auto or burst mode fire selection.

However the previous ban lumped in any rifles which meet the criteria of a detachable box magazine plus any two of the features as:

- Folding or telescoping stock
- Pistol grip
- Bayonet lug
- Flash suppressor

Any rifles which exceed the aforementioned restrictions seem to be thrown into the assualt weapon category, despite not actually being an "assault weapon".

Did I get that right?

I think so but I'll defer to folks like HB or Ethan who clearly have more knowledge than me on the topic of guns.

I remember when the original ban when into effect. There was no youtube back in the dark ages but I remember evening news shows (hah, remember when those were where people got most of their news?) where someone would take the action from a hunting rifle, drop it into a different stock, and suddenly it was banned.
post #1540 of 1722
That's pretty much it. It's hilarious, certain AR-15 configurations were banned, but the Ruger Ranch rifle wasn't. It's practically the same rifle just in a completely different stock so it doesn't look evil. And honestly I prefer the Ruger, which is also infinitely customizable.




I never got this because I heard some bad reviews on the quality of the product, but I always wanted to turn my ranch rifle into this:





Those two rifles are the same thing, just a different stock. Yet one looks evil and bad and one looks like what a farmer would carry to shoot at varmints.
post #1541 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harold falcon View Post

That's pretty much it. It's hilarious, certain AR-15 configurations were banned, but the Ruger Ranch rifle wasn't. It's practically the same rifle just in a completely different stock so it doesn't look evil. And honestly I prefer the Ruger, which is also infinitely customizable.




I never got this because I heard some bad reviews on the quality of the product, but I always wanted to turn my ranch rifle into this:





Those two rifles are the same thing, just a different stock. Yet one looks evil and bad and one looks like what a farmer would carry to shoot at varmints.

You have a ranch?
post #1542 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harold falcon View Post

That's pretty much it. It's hilarious, certain AR-15 configurations were banned, but the Ruger Ranch rifle wasn't. It's practically the same rifle just in a completely different stock so it doesn't look evil. And honestly I prefer the Ruger, which is also infinitely customizable.




I never got this because I heard some bad reviews on the quality of the product, but I always wanted to turn my ranch rifle into this:





Those two rifles are the same thing, just a different stock. Yet one looks evil and bad and one looks like what a farmer would carry to shoot at varmints.

 

You can get the Mini-14 in a scary black color from the factory..


In fact:

5846.jpg


This is an option for the Mini-14 from the factory - would be banned under the federal assault weapons bill (and all the bills being proposed).  Functionally the exact same gun as the Mini-14 ranch rifle you posted.

post #1543 of 1722
Will the Mini 14 chamber both the Nato round and .223? Ruger is way cheaper than an AR, no?
post #1544 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Will the Mini 14 chamber both the Nato round and .223? Ruger is way cheaper than an AR, no?


Yes.  The Mini 14 is a sweet option.  My buddy has the ranch rifle version.

post #1545 of 1722
Quote:
 I was able to buy an AR-15 in five minutes

Title of the article. ^

 

Quote:
 After he walked me through the paperwork, all five pages of it, I told him I changed my mind and wanted to think more before I bought an AR-15. He told me it wasn’t a problem and listed the store hours if I wanted to come back. I then said thank you and walked back to my car.

 

So he didn't actually buy it.

 

Quote:
 

Seconds. It took seconds for the salesman to take an AR-15 off the shelf and begin selling it to me. If I had stayed for maybe three minutes longer to fill out less paperwork than I did for the hiring process at my school’s bookstore, I would’ve driven home with an AR-15.

 

No delay. No extensive background check. Just my recently expired driver’s license, my vehicle registration, and filling out some paperwork.

That's simply not true.  He would have had to complete a background check and produced a valid form of government ID (which includes not expired).

 

Quote:
 I was taken by surprise a bit. This is the AR-15, the same weapon the gunman in Orlando used to kill 50 people; the same weapon used in the terrorist attack that occurred two days ago.

Token falsehood about the Orlando shooter using an AR-15.

 

Quote:
 

After exchanging conversation for about five minutes, I asked, “Can I buy this today?” The seller replied, “Yeah, sure. I just need to see your driver’s license and have you fill out the paperwork.”

 

I gave him my license, then reached for my receipt showing I renewed it the week before. Before I even got it out of my pocket, the employee told me I was good and I just needed my vehicle registration for verification. He didn’t notice that my license had expired recently.

Or perhaps because you had the receipt to show you it was renewed, you were okay, and he asked for the vehicle registration as an additional form of ID to prove that.  Though based on all the other bullshit in the article, this is probably made up.

 

https://thetab.com/us/2016/06/14/i-was-able-to-buy-an-ar-15-in-five-minutes-19833?utm_source=student&utm_medium=ec&utm_campaign=tabpages

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Take all of the guns. All of them.