Obama forbids sale of S Korean Garands/Carbines

Clark500 · September 2, 2010, 06:00 PM

Has anybody seen this? Another blow to our hobby.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...est=latestnews

Don H · September 2, 2010, 08:03 PM

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=420721

EdInk · September 2, 2010, 09:25 PM

I love all the buck-passing from the government. Also, the "haha you can't have them" attitude from the anti people.

I don't know which sickens me more, the ignorance or the arrogance.

Master_Of_Metal · September 3, 2010, 12:24 AM

The woman from the Brady Bunch is either a retard or is lying. She claims that these rifles take high capacity magazines. I wish I could debate her in public to expose her for the snake that she is. These rifles take 8 rounds into an internal magazine. 8 rounds is not high capacity.

Winchester_73 · September 3, 2010, 12:26 AM

Quote:

The woman from the Brady Bunch is either a retard or is lying. She claims that these rifles take high capacity magazines. I wish I could debate her in public to expose her for the snake that she is. These rifles take 8 rounds into an internal magazine. 8 rounds is not high capacity.

While this is true, its true only for M1 rifles aka garands. The article specifically mentions M1 carbines which take 15 or 30+ round magazines. I'm not saying its right, but to the media, anything over 10 is "high capacity".

I am in disbelief about the story.

EdInk · September 3, 2010, 12:58 AM

Believe it.

Yeah, they take "high capacity" magazines FULL of .30 carbine ammo! Which we all is know the best "high power" caliber, readily available to gang members!

I know they work. My grandpa fought in the Pacific on several islands. However, it was designed to replace two guns and did neither.

Bamashooter · September 3, 2010, 01:38 AM

does that really suprise anyone? obama doesnt care about your gun rights or the constitution. i wonder if he knows i have a .22 with a 25rd. mag? shhhhh..

Cheapshooter · September 3, 2010, 01:57 AM

Quote:

obama doesnt care about your gun rights or the constitution.

Wrong. He cares deeply about our gun rights. He wants to repeal them!!!

woodguru · September 23, 2010, 01:58 AM

Clinton in 68, Bush 1, Bush 2 refused to overturn or repeal either ban.

This is not an Obama thing he dreamed up because he is after anything. He'd be on a hot seat no matter what he does wouldn't he?

It's a bit ignorant and short sighted to lay this one in Obama's lap.

DWFan · September 23, 2010, 03:05 AM

Hardly, woodguru. This was done by executive order so the blame lies entirely with the President. (And a complete reversal of what he had stated last year.) Besides, the taxpayer is going to pay for them anyway as the State Dept. is now going to purchase them (reimburse is their word for it) and assist S. Korea with their disposal.

Drachenstein · September 23, 2010, 06:23 AM

Let's see if I got this right, we sold these arms to S Korea under a lend lease. Now that they are obsolete we are going to buy them back and then destroy them? In the present state of our national debt I fail to see economic sense in this.

I would wonder what we sold them for and what we are buying them for.

Tamara · September 23, 2010, 07:18 AM

Closed for:

1) Politics.

2) Duplicate thread.

September 2, 2010, 06:00 PM	#1
Clark500 Senior Member Join Date: February 12, 2010 Posts: 168	Obama forbids sale of S Korean Garands/Carbines Has anybody seen this? Another blow to our hobby. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...est=latestnews

September 2, 2010, 08:03 PM	#2
Don H Senior Member Join Date: May 8, 2000 Location: SLC,Utah Posts: 2,704	http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=420721 __________________ Don http://www.utahconcealedcarry.com/forum/

September 2, 2010, 09:25 PM	#3
EdInk Senior Member Join Date: May 27, 2009 Posts: 3,968	I love all the buck-passing from the government. Also, the "haha you can't have them" attitude from the anti people. I don't know which sickens me more, the ignorance or the arrogance. __________________ Sic Semper Tyrannis Last edited by Tamara; September 23, 2010 at 07:16 AM. Reason: Attempts to sidestep the profanity filter deleted.

September 3, 2010, 12:58 AM	#6
EdInk Senior Member Join Date: May 27, 2009 Posts: 3,968	Believe it. Yeah, they take "high capacity" magazines FULL of .30 carbine ammo! Which we all is know the best "high power" caliber, readily available to gang members! I know they work. My grandpa fought in the Pacific on several islands. However, it was designed to replace two guns and did neither. __________________ Sic Semper Tyrannis

September 23, 2010, 01:58 AM	#9
woodguru Senior Member Join Date: September 14, 2010 Location: Placerville, Ca Posts: 589	Clinton in 68, Bush 1, Bush 2 refused to overturn or repeal either ban. This is not an Obama thing he dreamed up because he is after anything. He'd be on a hot seat no matter what he does wouldn't he? It's a bit ignorant and short sighted to lay this one in Obama's lap. __________________ Fiction is harder to write than the truth, fiction has to make sense, the truth can be unbelievable.

September 3, 2010, 12:24 AM	#4
Master_Of_Metal Junior Member Join Date: September 2, 2010 Posts: 5	The woman from the Brady Bunch is either a retard or is lying. She claims that these rifles take high capacity magazines. I wish I could debate her in public to expose her for the snake that she is. These rifles take 8 rounds into an internal magazine. 8 rounds is not high capacity.

September 3, 2010, 01:38 AM	#7
Bamashooter Senior Member Join Date: March 12, 2010 Posts: 1,860	does that really suprise anyone? obama doesnt care about your gun rights or the constitution. i wonder if he knows i have a .22 with a 25rd. mag? shhhhh..

September 23, 2010, 03:05 AM	#10
DWFan Senior Member Join Date: April 25, 2008 Posts: 305	Hardly, woodguru. This was done by executive order so the blame lies entirely with the President. (And a complete reversal of what he had stated last year.) Besides, the taxpayer is going to pay for them anyway as the State Dept. is now going to purchase them (reimburse is their word for it) and assist S. Korea with their disposal. Last edited by DWFan; September 23, 2010 at 03:12 AM.

September 23, 2010, 06:23 AM	#11
Drachenstein Senior Member Join Date: November 1, 2008 Location: Elizabethtown, KY Posts: 224	Let's see if I got this right, we sold these arms to S Korea under a lend lease. Now that they are obsolete we are going to buy them back and then destroy them? In the present state of our national debt I fail to see economic sense in this. I would wonder what we sold them for and what we are buying them for.

September 23, 2010, 07:18 AM	#12
Tamara Moderator Emeritus Join Date: March 11, 2000 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 16,002	Closed for: 1) Politics. 2) Duplicate thread.