The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 12, 2013, 09:21 PM   #51
Metal god
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 3,134
it is not up to us to have to prove to Piers Morgan, why we need them. Since, semi-automatic rifles are so rarely used in criminal activity;
Oh how right you are !!!

Check out this chart . It shows only 358 deaths out of 10k+ do to RIFLES not ASSAULT rifles just rifles . Im sure the number goes way down if your just talking about "assault" rifles . This is what also needs to be talked about . They are talking about banning something that does less then 1% off the deaths .

Why do I carry a 45 ? because they don't make a 46
Metal god is offline  
Old January 12, 2013, 10:34 PM   #52
Bud Helms
Join Date: December 31, 1999
Location: Middle Georgia
Posts: 13,132
Murders, not deaths. That would run all the nmbers up, I'm sure.
"The irony of the Information Age is that it has given new respectability to uninformed opinion." - John Lawton, speaking to the American Association of Broadcast Journalists in 1995
Bud Helms is offline  
Old January 12, 2013, 11:12 PM   #53
Join Date: November 11, 2012
Posts: 72
I don't "need" an assault rifle, but If I "want" one, then I should be able to buy one. If I have the money and can pass a background check, then why not?

I'm so sick and tired of these liberal hacks on the news talking about "hunting" and "sporting purpose" when it comes the 2nd Ammendment. THAT'S NOT WHAT THE 2-A IS ABOUT!!!.

The 2-A is about protection from a tyrannical govt, something the media idiots will never understand.
Colorado308shooter is offline  
Old January 12, 2013, 11:31 PM   #54
Senior Member
Join Date: May 29, 2010
Location: Broomfield CO
Posts: 698
The most convincing argument that I have come up with outside of defending against tyranny has been this "Out of all of the firearms I own, my AR-15 is the only one in which I am truly confident that my wife can pick it up and engage multiple armed intruders and score center mass hits each time she pulls the trigger"

She has chased off armed intruders before when I haven't been around (before we lived in a free state where I could own my Rock River) and let me know that she did not feel confident with the handgun she had if it had turned into a gunfight.

My wife is safe= me being happy. All other things aside, that is what truly matters for me.
Rob228 is offline  
Old January 12, 2013, 11:32 PM   #55
Metal god
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 3,134
Murders, not deaths. That would run all the Numbers up, I'm sure.
Yes , sorry if you say all deaths by firearm it's more like 25k and almost all of those extras are suicides . My point is still the same but thank you for helping me clarify .

The anti's keep saying these "ASSAULT" weapons must be taken off the streets . When the fact is they are almost never used in firearm related murders or shootings .
Why do I carry a 45 ? because they don't make a 46
Metal god is offline  
Old January 12, 2013, 11:44 PM   #56
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2002
Posts: 138
I answer with the points from this video:


TFL survivor, THR member, TFL member once again!
Aikibiker is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 01:01 PM   #57
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 10,038
Facts don't matter to the antis - they intentionally lie and change facts to suit their purpose. They have stated, many times, that their goal is to eliminate all forms of gun ownership and destroy the NRA. You have to deal with antis the same way you would deal with liars, bullies, thugs and would-be tyrants. They do not lack understanding, they simply don't want guns or gun owners to exist, and they are willing to do whatever it takes to make this happen. What do I mean by this? When they call gun owners "lunatic fringe" and "racist", we need to call them Stalinists and Hitlers, Ted Bundies, or anyone else who likes to prey on and murder defenseless people.

Save the rational explanations for non-gun owners who are simply ignorant about 2nd Amendment and gun ownership. We will ALWAYS lose the fight when we try to fight fair against a bunch of low-down dirty fighters. If you want to win, you have to not only stand your ground, but try to take new ground and learn to fight dirtier than the nastiest gun-banning fascist. This means that the NRA should push politicians to put the repeal of the '89 ban as well as the '86 machinegun ban on the table, organize protests, marches, and provide us with an outlet to display who we are. Our numbers far outnumber any lousy Occupy Movement.

Last edited by Skans; January 14, 2013 at 01:13 PM.
Skans is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 07:49 PM   #58
Join Date: January 14, 2013
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 51
Why does anyone need to own a Maserati or a Rolls Royce? A Honda Civic will get you to the grocery store just as effectively.

It's because I have the financial means to do so and I am a lawful and responsible citizen who will use it only for legal sporting purposes....and because I can.

Oh, and they're also a lot of fun to shoot at the range!

Last edited by TommyP; January 14, 2013 at 07:54 PM.
TommyP is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 07:52 PM   #59
Join Date: January 14, 2013
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 51
Also, people of Piers Morgan's ilk fail to realize that these guns are already in the country in large numbers, and that making them illegal will only disenfranchise and hurt law abiding citizens. Criminals could care less if they're legal or illegal.
TommyP is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 08:09 PM   #60
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2010
Posts: 495
Well, why does anyone need alcohol? At least guns can protect my family. What does alcohol do? It costs society more money than it generates. Of course, we know from experience that banning alcohol won't stop people from drinking...and so it is with guns, magazines, and the like.

Did you know that 75,000 people die from alcohol in the US per year!

I mean, can't you get drunk on Light Beer? Why do you need whiskey? If guns are safer with 10 round mags, then alcohol would be safer if we just banned everything, but beer.

All sarcasm aside, listen to a Piers Morgan rant on guns and replace "11,000 gun deaths" with "75,000 alcohol related deaths", replace "gun" with "alcohol", and "assault rifle" with "whiskey". It sounds like a tired speech from the prohibition era. (Of course, it's a lot more fun to drink every time Piers defies logic or talks over his guest.)

Last edited by testuser; January 14, 2013 at 08:17 PM.
testuser is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 10:12 PM   #61
Join Date: February 5, 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 72
I think this guy does a pretty good job...(14 minutes). sorry if posted before I just missed it.

I do find it difficult to explain to my "anti" friends and coworkers about the 2a and possible tyranny of government. They think I am of my rocker.
monkey95 is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:57 AM   #62
Junior Member
Join Date: February 28, 2012
Posts: 9
Piers was on Colbert tonight. While Colbert poked some fun at us, during the interview he kept handing Morgan pocket-sized Constitutions and repeatedly asked him "Have you read the Constitution?". I thought it was well done.
bigfinger76 is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 12:37 PM   #63
Dr Big Bird PhD
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 778
Piers was on Colbert tonight. While Colbert poked some fun at us, during the interview he kept handing Morgan pocket-sized Constitutions and repeatedly asked him "Have you read the Constitution?". I thought it was well done.
anyone have a link to this?
I told the new me,
"Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'"
But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back."
Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor
Dr Big Bird PhD is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:28 PM   #64
Senior Member
Join Date: November 18, 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,124
They do not lack understanding, they simply don't want guns or gun owners to exist, and they are willing to do whatever it takes to make this happen.
There you have it.

Carpe Cerveza
geetarman is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:45 PM   #65
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2005
Location: Left coast
Posts: 602
Just watched last night's Colbert Report.

Colbert made the very important point that disarming the people is simply unconstitutional.

For this reason I don't think we have much to worry about. This is compounded by congress' inability to function properly. I doubt, any new legislation will be passed, but we just won't know until it either happens or doesn't.
Imagine what I would do, if I could do all I can.
Dre_sa is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:49 PM   #66
Tom Servo
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 11,994
anyone have a link to this?
Here you go. Nothing much is achieved, but Colbert is entertaining, even if he does get the wording of the 1st and 2nd Amendments mixed up.
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:51 PM   #67
Strafer Gott
Senior Member
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,256
Don't promote polarization. Practice conversion. Be the proselyte. Be the object of emulation. We aren't angry gun owners. We are happy people who happen to own guns. Never threaten. No one has started a revolution. Express concern and remorse, and offer realistic options. And please, make an effort to smile more. This matter will be solved in the courts, by attorneys.
There's just no place for a street fighting man.
If you want to fight, fight with your checkbook!
Strafer Gott is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 06:36 PM   #68
Join Date: June 16, 2011
Posts: 20
Here's my response. I sent to my local paper as well.

Why does anyone need an “Assault Weapon”?

All you have to do is look at history. Governments and religion have shown repeatedly that people will commit genocide and crush someone else's Rights that we are supposed to hold dear. The problem with American's is we live in a fairly peaceful society and haven't had a war here in a long time, thankfully. People have forgotten why the population is supposed to scare the government...because it keeps the government from killing us or trampling out our Rights. Anyone that wants to take firearms "because they are scary" has a tyrant mentality and those are the people that the 2nd Amendment is supposed to check, in the checks and balances. Stalin and the Socialists killed over 40 million of their own citizens that Stalin thought would give him trouble. While I'm alive, I will fight to not allow that to happen here. The 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting or sporting guns, it's about the citizenry being able to check the tyrannical power of the government. That's why we need guns and by the way, these AR-15's and AK semi-automatic clones are not actually assault rifles as that is a misnomer. New manufacture of assault rifles for civilians has been banned since National Firearms Act of 1986 was passed. To own a fully-automatic assault rifle as a civilian you have to jump through a tremendous number of hoops and background checks, not to mention they are incredibly expensive.

Now, you might ask/argue: I could arm myself to the teeth and I wouldn't be very effective against a government looking to trample me, right? The Second Amendment is about the maintenance of militias--people's armies who are well-armed, TRAINED, and ready to protect the people against a tyrannical government. So, to protect our Second Amendment rights, we should be joining the National Guard, not fighting to personally own guns, right?

The answer to this question is: The National Guard is a Federal entity. It was incorporated into the Federal Government on 21 January 1903 with the Militia Act of 1903 under Title 10 and Title 32 of the U.S. Code. If the country split, half of the military and police would be on one side and the other half would be on the other. Again, we have to understand the past in order to prevent/repeat it in the future. In the recent past even, we have an example of a civilized government acting tyrannically. Yugoslavia held the Olympics in 1988, and four short years later it was head long in a civil war that destroyed the country and killed a large segment of its population. Anyone remember the Bosnian War from 1992-1995? And yes, you can be armed to the teeth and be part of a movement that stops a tyrannical group of people that are hell bent on getting their own way. A dictator will not stand in this country because normal citizens can rise up, grouping together to stop it.

This is not about saving corporations, it's about saving a peaceful society that is based on a Republic model of government. In reality, we, the citizens of the USA live in a Constitutional Republic. The Constitution is supposed to protect the minority, not the majority. If a totalitarian despotic regime persuaded the majority to kill or jail certain groups of people like Hitler did, that could still be a Democracy. Currently, in Venezuela, where there is a Democracy, there is also Socialist Dictator that is in control of the media suppressing opposing views, asking for your ‘papers’ at check points along the roads, limiting movement and commerce among the people and using the military to control anyone that might oppose his views. The design of a constitutional republic is structured to protect the fundamental rights of the individual from the overreaction, popular whims or “mob rule” of a pure direct democracy. In our constitutional republic, the fundamental rights of speech, association, religion, freedom from imprisonment without due process and life are not subject to the whims of a popular vote or enactment of mere laws. Rather, they are enshrined in our Constitution and its amendments, which are better insulated from popular and political irrationality.

The worst part about all of these horrific shootings is the media and their seemingly endless cry to demonize gun owners. I am glad they have the First Amendment to stand behind and express their views, but there has to be balance as well. The weight of the specific, individual right to self-defense and to keep and bear arms should not be subjected to the media’s emotional cry for protection from a perceived, nondescript, unidentifiable, nonspecific threat. Such is the current cry of some for a new “assault weapons” ban. Stripping citizens of their fundamental rights requires more than an irrational fear of the name “AR-15,” or of a magazine capable of carrying 10, 15, 20 or 100 rounds of ammunition. I hope this issue calms down and people start thinking about how all of our fundamental rights protect us…
We have the right to DUE PROCESS (5th Amendment) to keep the government from taking your guns. You have the right to elect representatives that will work, lobby, and argue mine and your point of view, and to replace those representatives (or try to anyway) if they do not achieve your desired outcome. And, yes , the Constitution can be CHANGED. The Second Amendment can be INTERPRETED. That is the nature of our legislative process. It is not perfect and quite often damn infuriating, but I'll keep the one we’ve got over any other on the planet thank-you-very-much.

On January 19, 2013, the first-ever "Gun Appreciation Day," will be held around the country. If you believe in the right to bear arms, then turn out at gun stores, ranges and shows from coast to coast in a PEACEFUL effort to rally and support the 2nd Amendment and your rights. Show up with your Constitution, American flags and your signs to send a loud and clear message to members of the Virginia legislature, members of Congress, and the President.

I am glad that we have the First Amendment that allows me to express my view and we can have a civil discussion and you do not have to agree with me. I believe that the 5th Amendment protecting Due Process is one of the major reasons that we have had a pretty peaceful society and transitions of power for the past 150 years. I just hope you will heed my thoughts about history repeating itself and we wise up as a nation. I leave you with a pertinent quote from one of our Founding Fathers and fellow Virginian, Thomas Jefferson which was in a letter to William S. Smith (13 November 1787).
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty....
..what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them." --Thomas Jefferson
Hunterpeaks is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 04:51 AM   #69
Metal god
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 3,134
Morgan on the tonight show last night .

Just watched the tonight show . Well really only part of it cus I turned it off after jay was done with the Piers Morgan interview . I then deleted the show and stopped my DVR from recording the show from now on . I was so disappointed that Jay just let him spew his garbage with out challenging him in any way . It was as if jay was there to just serve up balls for piers to hit out of the park . Very sad to see for me .

Sorry cant find a link . The one thats on the NBC website does not show the interview per-say just the part about Alec Jones or what ever the guys name is that went on Morgans show and made a fool of him self .
Why do I carry a 45 ? because they don't make a 46

Last edited by Metal god; February 1, 2013 at 07:32 PM.
Metal god is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 09:25 AM   #70
Senior Member
Join Date: December 25, 2010
Posts: 587
I don't "need" my AK-47, I've also never "needed":
A seat belt
A motorcycle helmet
A smoke detector
renters insurance
A first aid kit

I should probably knock on wood, and guess what has a wood stock! Be right back, I "need" to go grab my AK.
Someday I'll be good enough to know if a gun is accurate or not.
MrDontPlay is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 01:27 PM   #71
44 AMP
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 15,608

Where is it written in US law (or anywhere) that one must have a need as legal justification for owning property, or taking an otherwise legal action?

Here are a couple of arguments to throw at the next person who demands you produce a "need" for something...

1) Why do you need...xxxx? I don't. Why does it matter to you?
Roza Parks didn't have a need to sit in the front of the bus. Those gentlemen didn't have a need to sit at that lunch counter...etc...

2) We have minimum wage laws. Obviously, in the govt eyes, that is all the money you need to live on. So, I'll make a deal with you, I'll give up my "assault weapon" if you will give up every penny you make, above the minimum wage....

Watch them vapor lock over those concepts. IT probably won't change their stance, but it ought to be good for at least a few minutes of entertainment!
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 01:36 PM   #72
Senior Member
Join Date: January 24, 2013
Location: NC
Posts: 545
I have an answer: "Pickles"
He would then say: PICKLES!
I would say: That's what I said
He would say: THATS NOT AN ANSWER!
I would say: That's my answer.
He would say: That makes no sense to me
I would say: That's how I felt about the question
He would say: Really, do you have a real answer?
I would say: Pickles
eldermike is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 01:54 PM   #73
Senior Member
Join Date: June 21, 2010
Location: Central Georgia
Posts: 1,746
Some people call me a "tru Republican", other have said I'm a Libertarian, a professor once said I was an "anti-federalist" and I prefer to think of myself as a Constitutionalist/State's Rights proponent.

But regardless of the nomenclature, as a free American citizen, who has spilt blood for his country, I just can't abide by someone telling me what I do/do not need.

It is not a matter of want or need, it is a matter of personal liberty.
NRA Life Member
Ladyfriend: "I need help with the leaves in the yard"
Me: "Controlled burn?"
LadyFriend: "I forgot my Boy Scout turned into an infantry officer."
SPEMack618 is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 03:10 PM   #74
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2007
Posts: 1,201
Who cares what piers morgan thinks. Besides, its isn't illegal to own a "assault weapon" and who determines what my needs are. He certainly doesn't.
TheNatureBoy is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 03:40 PM   #75
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Location: AZ
Posts: 202
First, we need to stop calling it an "Assault Weapon" and kowtowing to their calling it that. They are semi-automatic rifles!!! Their word is purely political and had not been even considered since the 1990's when cigars became REALLY popular.

Lastly, Piers Morgan is insignificant.

You can fill in whatever you like between the first and last.

Have a great day,

The natural state of man, the way G‑d created us, is to be happy.
Look at children and you will see
I'vebeenduped is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2016 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12916 seconds with 7 queries