Ping King

iTrader: (20)

SON OF A BITCH! My buddy just ordered one and apparently they just banned .50 caliber sniper rifles.

On fox news they said it was motivated by trying to stop terrorism saying that all you had to do was walk into a store and buy one.

Right..like a terrorist who is probably on the watch list is going to get a firearms ID..walk into a gun store...purchase this weapon with his/her name on record..and then start taking out parked aircraft at newark airport.

I gotta get out of this place.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Damn, as if all of the semi auto handgun limitations weren't enough, now they're going after long guns too!

Whip

People are so cluless it amazes me! PIng, you couldn't have said it better. What do these people think....all criminals buy guns the legal way? I'm not even going to continue with my rant. ******* Hilary nation!

WJ SOM SS

iTrader: (11)

What about the 15 yr. old kid who gets into his old man's gun closet and puts on his trenchcoat, goes to school and starts lighting the place up? Maybe that's part of the reason for the ban....What's the purpose of a .50 cal anyway? Too many young kids getting ahold of high power weapons and killing w/them. Just a opinion from the other side.... WJ

02hawk133

Reminds me of the recent Outdoor Life word on the Colbert Report:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherl...ml_video=82847

"The 2nd amendment allows me to hunt squirrel with a Patriot Missile"

WS6TransAm01

iTrader: (13)

Well maybe because kids are the ones doing the killing in your arguments, having Kids should be baned?

Once again, guns don't kill people, retards with guns kill people...

There is no point in banning a category of weapon as long as we have some dumb f*cks running around people will still get hurt.

I guess Ill just have to rely on my trusty 7.62mm Dragunoff...

tektrans

iTrader: (23)

They banned sniper rifles?
What will we do?

11 Bravo

iTrader: (3)

You and I both. This place is a different planet. I can't recall anyone being murdered by a .50 cal sniper rifle. Can't recall hearing about a child bringing one to school, either.

Mr. B

iTrader: (1)

1st off.. I am VERY pro-gun.

However- what the HELL does one need a 50 cal weapon for?

2nd- Most buyers will be surprised to hear that no ranges will appreciate a 50 cal AP round wizzing downrange to the tune of *miles*

3rd- The cost associated with the 50 cal (unless you reload, like I did) will be astronomical.

For those who ain't gun folks- the 50 cal is on the left:



Get a really nice bolt action or the new AR "black guns" with a nice barrel, buy surplus ammo, and have a blast.

Nautilus

iTrader: (15)

While I agree that there may not be a very practical purpose for a .50cal rifle... Can anyone tell me the last time someone held up a liquer store with a .50 caliber. Alot of people are killed in this counrty from driving to fast but we shouldn't bann high horsepower cars because a small percentage of the population isn't responsible.

Look...




Neither one of these has any practical use... But I don't think anyone should be able to take away my right to own them.

Ping King

iTrader: (20)

its not that you need a .50 for anything..its the principal. Its also the fact that they use the same stupid *** arguement.

http://www.forcesciencenews.com/home...al=62%E2%80%9D

Again...heres an article about how many LEOs were attacked with weapons and what kind. Just about all of them were bought illegally through drug deals and street transactions.

brad8266

iTrader: (23)

1. NJ is the land of liberalism. I grew up in that cesspool and left and will never go back.
2. They take .50 cal now, so whats to say sooner or later they dont ban .30 caliber, and then eventually they ban handguns. Once they have the power to ban one they can potentially ban all they want. its all about liberals and their need for power and control.

Mr. B

iTrader: (1)

The two black guns and the AK variants are very useful and probably the most widespread weapons going. The idea of civilian ownership of military weapons (Barrett 50 cal, Browning 50 cal) scares folks.. especially folks how don't appreciate these TOOLS for what they are meant for. The cartridge is called the 50 BMG (Browning Machine Gun) and that alone tells you something.

When I first carried a weapon in the 90's, the use of *anything* with the name "Magnum" scared people shitless.. and many cops died using politically correct .38 LRN "widowmaker" (lead round nose) ammo in a basic gun that goes back over 100 years.

All I'm saying is- PICK YOUR BATTLES!

Mr. B

iTrader: (1)

That would have to be:

1) One big-assed backpack
2) One strong-assed kid
3) One wealthy kid, too!

Ping King

iTrader: (20)

Bob, i know you were a LEO in some capacity, did you read that article with teh statistics. Im not saying that illegal use of firearms isnt a problem, but hurting the peopel who actually go by the law to buy weapons is rididuculous when criminals themselves, who are criminals, can give a **** less about how they get their weapons.

brad8266

iTrader: (23)

You can ban whatever you want, criminals will still get their hands on what they want anyway. the only people it hurts is the law abiding citizen that now ownt be able to own weapons meanwhile the criminal is still getting them anyway.

Whip

There are plenty of good laws on the books. Enforce them before we add more! And most LEO's can suck my sack, because MOST of them know less about gun laws than they should, and assume ANY civilian carry is bad. Know and do your job before ranting to introduce more laws.

obsolete346

iTrader: (7)

I'm with Mr. B on this. I'm very pro gun and have fired the D.E. .50 and the Barret .50 BMG rifle. The only use for them is the novelty of it. Pick a fight on gun control that means something. Also think about what damage a law abiding citizen who snaps could do with a .50 machine gun and say a .30-06. Be reasonable it's not that big of a deal.

Mr. B

iTrader: (1)

I read a great article in a law enforcement training guide that spelled out the stat's- down to precisely how many seconds, total shots fired, most probable weapon, etc.

The 50 cal is NOT a weapon that would be used in the commission of strong arm robberies or crimes of passion, etc.

The politicians are worried that a legal owner's weapon would fall into the wrong hands, via burglary or permit holder passing away or not properly securing a weapon. The same can be said for Aunt Tessies Pearl Handled .38 or Uncle Bob Duty Weapon.

Instead of demonizing inanimate objects, the proper security requirements should be implemented (in NY a safe is required after a certain amount of weapons)

I could personally care less if a citizen wanted a Barrett 50 cal, as long as he kept it secure and was a responsible owner. It boggles the mind (unless you are training to be a Ranger or Marine Sniper) WHY anyone would spent $8,000.00 for such a limited-use weapon.

With the same money, I would buy a DCM AR-15:



a nice shooting handgun:



and a nice shotgun



instead of this.. and have 5k left over..but that's just me!



However- I will fight for your right to own one.

Nautilus

iTrader: (15)

If they ban these guns... and it does absolutely nothing to prevent gun crime. (Statistics from Washington DC and California show these kinds of bans have NO effect on gun crime) Than whats next... semi auto hand guns, etc. As a matter of fact the Brady campaign has even talked about their belief that "sniper rifles" should be banned. They described "sniper rifles" as scoped hunting type rifles capable of killing at over 100 yards... Don't think your hunting rifles won't make the list at some point. I just see the second amendment issue as a slippery slope...


Think of what a law abiding citizen could do with 10 gallons of gasoline and a match...