planeflyer21 Posted February 3, 2013 Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 At least the media is now open about their agenda.From the article, "Assault weapons that can fire numerous times in seconds are designed for only one thing: killing large numbers of people. The military and law enforcement officers need that ability; ordinary law-abiding citizens do not."http://www.examiner.com/article/government-prepares-for-war-with-the-people-and-mass-media-approves?CID=obinsiteJon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNP Posted February 3, 2013 Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 We should have taken out a Super Bowl ad. How is it that nobody believes that one day, I , a law abiding citizen, might actually have to kill a large number of people? I don't look forward to it, but are we so civilized now that it can't happen? I mean, I see it going on elsewhere in the world today. Countries fighting their own...usually with some sort of crazy government along with it. Why won't that happen here? And when it does, why won't the second amendment apply to the ordinary law abiding citizen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planeflyer21 Posted February 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 We should have taken out a Super Bowl ad. How is it that nobody believes that one day, I , a law abiding citizen, might actually have to kill a large number of people? I don't look forward to it, but are we so civilized now that it can't happen? I mean, I see it going on elsewhere in the world today. Countries fighting their own...usually with some sort of crazy government along with it. Why won't that happen here? And when it does, why won't the second amendment apply to the ordinary law abiding citizen?Good idea...butyou don't think the network would refuse a pro-gun ad?Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNP Posted February 3, 2013 Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 Naw. They are fair and balanced. It's required by the all mighty leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted February 3, 2013 Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 At least the media is now open about their agenda.From the article, "Assault weapons that can fire numerous times in seconds are designed for only one thing: killing large numbers of people. The military and law enforcement officers need that ability; ordinary law-abiding citizens do not."Ironically, now that I am "retired military," I'm just an "ordinary law-abiding citizen" - now.So, by their mentality, I shouldn't be permitted to own any of these weapons. I'm neither "military," nor "law enforcement." On that note, I'll bet I've trained more overall, with more frequency, with more ammunition, with many more different types of these weapons that most of the law enforcement force in this nation - who would be permitted to own these types of weapons... Their hypocracy knows no bounds... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planeflyer21 Posted February 4, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Ironically, now that I am "retired military," I'm just an "ordinary law-abiding citizen" - now.So, by their mentality, I shouldn't be permitted to own any of these weapons. I'm neither "military," nor "law enforcement." On that note, I'll bet I've trained more overall, with more frequency, with more ammunition, with many more different types of these weapons that most of the law enforcement force in this nation - who would be permitted to own these types of weapons... Their hypocracy knows no bounds... A majority of law enforcement, probably high-90%s, aren't "gun people". Beyond mandatory qualification, they don't shoot. What they do know (hopefully) is their issue pistol and long guns.Military too for that matter. Once we got to the fleet out job was to operate the aircraft carrier. But John Q. thinks everyone that was in the military is automatically a small arms expert.My big personal motivator was a job interview for a counter person/range master. I was asked two questions. What is an I-frame? What is a D-frame? "Sorry, we're really looking for a firearms enthusiast for this position." In the pre-internet world, I-frame was a bitch to find.But none of it should matter when coming to passing unconstitutional laws.Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unforgiven Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 What is a "I" frame and "D" frame? <dontknow> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt.Cross Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 What is a "I" frame and "D" frame? <dontknow>I know a J-frame is a S&W revolver frame, that's the closest I'm going to be able to guess... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robocop1051 Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 I-frames were the old S&W small fram revolvers. I think they only came in small rimmed cases, like .22lr and .32I think the I-Frame was the first swing out cylinder too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.