Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

N. Korea mushroom cloud? Assault weapons ban?

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: JohnnyBz00LS

Last I've heard, the recent mushroom cloud sighted near the boarder of N. Korea and China was "a planned demolition event". WHAT kind of demolition project could possibly result in a mushroom cloud the size that could only be generated by an extrordinary amount (several mega tons) of explosives or a nuclear explosion? The White House apparently is not concerned, however they should be. Another example of lack of intellegence?

And how about this assult weapons ban that GW allowed to expire? He supported it before, but is now letting it die on the vine. Sounds like he is once again not "walking the talk". I especially enjoyed the news clip last night when he was being questioned by a reporter during a Michigan rally. As soon as the question about the AW ban came up, one of GW's aids quickly stepped in, pushed the reporter away and said, "That's all folks". What is he afraid of? Someone finding out the TRUTH about how he really feels about the issue? It's amazing how GW's campaign continues to "filter" questions and issues, only responds to the issues he chooses, controls the press w/ an iron fist and yet us "dumb Americans" (borrowing M. Moore's description here) let GW slide.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Why didn't the Democrats press the assault ban in Congress? Why didn't Kerry talk about it at the Convention? Why didn't the press make this a 'major news' event 4 months ago during the Democratic primaries? Hypocrites.

Oh, and I hear Kerry's position on North Korea is to hold one-on-one talks with them while Bush has brought together a coalition of Asian countries to deal with it.

Kerry is wrong on every issue he takes and he is the largest terrorist threat to the United States. IMHO, of course.

Posted by: Punisher

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

Why didn't the Democrats press the assault ban in Congress? Why didn't Kerry talk about it at the Convention? Why didn't the press make this a 'major news' event 4 months ago during the Democratic primaries? Hypocrites.

Oh, and I hear Kerry's position on North Korea is to hold one-on-one talks with them while Bush has brought together a coalition of Asian countries to deal with it.

Kerry is wrong on every issue he takes and he is the largest terrorist threat to the United States. IMHO, of course.

IMO Bush is the largest terrorist threat the U.S faces. As long as he is in office an waging war without backing of significant other countries we are make more enemies in the places we dont go to war at. They are getting even more bitter twards us, and will probly get more extreme as time goes on with there attack methods. just IMO, of course.

Posted by: SC_Steve

who really cares about the assault weapons ban? Seriously? How are assault weapons any more dangerous than a glock? They both do the same damned thing. They are designed to kill....that is all.

If a criminal wants a banned weapon, they will get it (or if not, they'll use another gun to commit a crime).... it really doesnt matter if their leagal or not. Plus now it makes the banned guns cheeper for collectors/enthusiests

Posted by: MonsterMark

Ya, I would rather get shot with a US made assault weapon than one that was Chinese made, supplied by an Iranian. And the Dems whine about exporting US manufacturing jobs.

Posted by: Punisher

Quote:

Originally Posted by SC_Steve

who really cares about the assault weapons ban? Seriously? How are assault weapons any more dangerous than a glock? They both do the same damned thing. They are designed to kill....that is all.

If a criminal wants a banned weapon, they will get it (or if not, they'll use another gun to commit a crime).... it really doesnt matter if their leagal or not. Plus now it makes the banned guns cheeper for collectors/enthusiests

Why make it easier for criminals to be better armed? Sure they all kill but some are more efficent then others. Without a ban the wannabe criminal can just go buy from a gun store and have unlimited amounts of supplies, where if they got it from less reputable sources they might only be able to get 1 or 2, instead of getting them and there 10 buddies all equiped well and rdy to cause havok.

Posted by: CaptainZilog

It doesn't make anything easier for criminals, because they will break the damn law anyhow. Ever hear of robbery? If you're planning on murdering someone, you don't use a licensed weapon, you steal it. Besides, I believe the statistics are like 1 rifle-caused murder for every 100 pistol-caused. The thing is, your common gang-banger isn't going to carry a long rifle around. They will always carry a stolen pistol or baby machine gun (Uzi, Mac 9). This law had nothing to do with pistols except reducing the size of the magazines.

Put another way, you will not stop crime by keeping weapons out of the hands of those who will obey the law. Crime did not even slow down when this ban was enforced, if you look at the statistics.

It's people like my mom who keep exclaiming, "OH GOD! People are gonna run down the street shooting their guns off at everyone!!!" that REALLY piss me off. In 'real land' they won't because if they were going to they already had the ability to. Again, all this law did was prevent the average law-abiding citizen from obtaining a weapon that is COSMETICALLY similar to a military-style assault rifle. No ban was lifted on automatic weapons (although, it should be as well), so all this Chicken Little crap is just that: crap.

Posted by: Punisher

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainZilog

It doesn't make anything easier for criminals, because they will break the damn law anyhow. Ever hear of robbery? If you're planning on murdering someone, you don't use a licensed weapon, you steal it. Besides, I believe the statistics are like 1 rifle-caused murder for every 100 pistol-caused. The thing is, your common gang-banger isn't going to carry a long rifle around. They will always carry a stolen pistol or baby machine gun (Uzi, Mac 9). This law had nothing to do with pistols except reducing the size of the magazines.

Put another way, you will not stop crime by keeping weapons out of the hands of those who will obey the law. Crime did not even slow down when this ban was enforced, if you look at the statistics.

It's people like my mom who keep exclaiming, "OH GOD! People are gonna run down the street shooting their guns off at everyone!!!" that REALLY piss me off. In 'real land' they won't because if they were going to they already had the ability to. Again, all this law did was prevent the average law-abiding citizen from obtaining a weapon that is COSMETICALLY similar to a military-style assault rifle. No ban was lifted on automatic weapons (although, it should be as well), so all this Chicken Little crap is just that: crap.

I agree with you somewhat. But I think your looking at it differently. Im not saying that a ban would stop crime, im saying it would help stop crimes from being comitted with a assault riffle. What is the point of owning 1 anyways, goin to go hunt some deer with it? Sure if someone really wanted to get 1 before they could have but, it probly would take alittle more work, and they may not get exactly what they want, or enough for there buddies. Plus I wonder if the fact that they will be sold retail would lower there costs? Making it easier to get 1, after all we are goin to produce them when we were not before for the average joe. I dunno, im not really for guns anyways unless its for hunting period.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainZilog

It's people like my mom who keep exclaiming, "OH GOD! People are gonna run down the street shooting their guns off at everyone!!!"

That's why everyone should own and be trained to handle a gun. Can you imagine a criminal running down the street firing his gun. He wouldn't make it 10 feet. LOL.

Maybe somebody has the 'facts' to post, not just b.s., but hasn't crime gone down in communities with concealed carry laws?

Posted by: Punisher

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

I would be shocked if crime didnt go down in communities with concealed carry laws, you have alot more to worry about if your a criminal. But you goin to be concealing a assault riffle? So whats the point?

Posted by: CaptainZilog

There are only a few rasons to own any weapon: sport, hunting, collectibility and finally and most importantly: defense.

The second amendment isn't there because of foreign invaders (although it helps if the regular army is stuck somewhere). It's to defend us from domestic enemies and tyranny. You might exclaim that in this modern era we don't have to worry about that. Maybe, maybe not. Remember, it wasn't too long ago that we were ruled by a tyrannical government. The US is teetering on becoming a poor place to live, it can go either way depending on the next two presidents, I predict. If they choose to respect the people and give them responsibility, then good for us - this country will thrive. If they choose to rule with an iron fist, and create a corporate oligarchy, then we have a problem. Personally, I see weapon bans as a form of distrust. It allows governments (in general) to do what they want without fear of retaliation. It was Thomas Jefferson who said "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."

MonsterMark, it is true, in places like Texas, violent crime has shot through the floor. I'm entirely too tired and lazy to look it up, though.

Remember, there are only X police - you should be vigilant of your own defense until they can arrive. If that means pulling a gun on a mugger/rapist, I'm all for it. A good person should not have to stand aside while their rights are violated by a criminal. You cause two things to happen in that situation:

1 - urge the criminal to continue being a criminal because of lax victim defense.
2 - cause the victim to start questioning the purpose of the law, since it certainly didn't help them, possibly turning them into a criminal.

People can act smart, or they can act like animals. I believe that limiting their behaviours encourages the "rat trapped in a corner" behaviour, while letting them explore with no personal limits (aka no intruding on other's rights) will breed a society of smarter, more tolerant and more experienced people.