Take Assault Weapons first, then let's get the Sniper Rifles

[WastedSaint]

You sheepishly call it dear old dad's deer rifle. I and other responsible people call it by it's real name, a Sniper Rifle.

Charles Whitman killed 13 people and wounded 32 others with his Sniper Rifle. That's more than that movie theater guy, and that was with dear old dad's Sniper Rifle.

The only purpose of a gun in the 21st century is to kill other people. You can buy your food at the store like everyone else. I'm sick of dead kids on the news.

Here's the toys that he killed those innocent people with. All guns are murderers tools.



No more Sniper Rifles!

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

1. I know this will ruffle the feathers of the gun crowd,

but all a .22 riffle needs to be a sniper is a scope and a suppressor.

Yes, they will complain that technically it doesn't match the definition, but if an assailant picked off 10 people in this method then what would the media and police be calling that assailant?

[a geek named Bob]

4. With a .22 ???

Neat trick...

[WastedSaint]

23. This guy likes playing with meat and it proves a point. .22 LR is enables mass

killing even for those on a budget.

[WastedSaint]

11. Even a .22 LR will go through both sides of a human head at 100 yards with almost no recoil.

I am surprised that a so-equipped Ruger 10/22 has not been used in this way in a mass killing. I'm sure they will be after we ban ARs and such.

Single shot doesn't matter either. Each shot is another dead kid. It's not hard to reload that fast even with a single shot. Look at this gun rubbing mouth breather doing it.

You want to shoot? Get a fucking bb gun. Too many dead kids. Blood on everyone's hand who enables this bullshit. Guns have ZERO place in the 21st century citizen's hands.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

93. All you need is one shot.

If somebody is truly sinister and crazy i.e serial killer they can kill when they want to. The thing is with these guys that blow their wad all at once makes a bigger tragedy.

The Beltway sniper kept the fear going for a few weeks, and nothing really changed. I believe he also used a Bushmaster to kill some of his victims.

BTW: I was shot, sniper style, by a kid my age (12 years old) while I was walking up the street one day. It hurt like hell, and I didn't know what had happened at first. The kid hit me with 1 shot at about 20 paces from his bedroom window.

[NickB79]

18. Suppressed .22 rimfires were widely used in Chechnya

By both the Russians and the rebels.

Quiet and deadly in the hands of a trained marksman who can make headshots.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

67. I caught a lot of flack in the DU gun club a few months ago for suggesting it.

[a geek named Bob]

2. Actually...

A fair number of people in the USA hunt for their food.

Who the hell are you to tell people where to get their food?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

5. Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Illinois just went Republican...

Every Election Year will be 1972 all over again.

[slackmaster]

6. HULA HOOPS... ...FLYING CARS... ...NIXON... ...THE FUT...

[Scootaloo]

88. Fritz the Cat!

?w=500

[a geek named Bob]

10. and how does this relate to the topic?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

24. Here's How:

Congressman A (D-Wherever) stands up and says that we (Democrats) want to ban hunting rifles.

And dozens of Democrats in the House and a half-dozen or more Democrats in the Senate lose their seats in Congress -- before the Supreme Court can ever have the change to rule on the matter, a ruling which will basically state "Which part of Columbia v. Heller don't you understand?"

That's how it relates.

[Mel Content]

99. illinois just went republican...? How so...?

in the november election, Illinois Democrats increased their majorities in both the state house and state senate.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

101. See post #24

And I'm talking national politics, but the same could also occur on the state level.

[slackmaster]

3. This will not end well.

[WastedSaint]

12. How is that? I speak the truth. Do you not want to hear the truth? nt

[slackmaster]

22. If you are serious, which I doubt very much, you are making a mistake that many gun control...

...proponents have made: Demanding too much. Pushing your agenda too far; so far that you cross into territory beyond what would be supported by any but the most extreme prohibitionists.

If anyone in Congress pursues that line of action, they are likely to end up with nothing.

The sad thing about your brand of obvious hyperbolic zealotry is that there are a few people on DU who are naive enough to buy into it.

[WastedSaint]

25. I'm not demanding too much. I'm demanding semi autos today.

Handguns tomorrow and everything else later on.

One bite at a time the 2nd Amendment lunacy will come to an end.

[slackmaster]

29. You are admitting that you would create the slippery slope which the right uses as a talking point

How is that helpful to a constructive dialogue?

[WastedSaint]

42. It's not a slippery slope it's a reality. You want to shoot guns go join the army.

For those that don't want to play GI Joe, you can have a pellet gun.

[a geek named Bob]

50. okay then...

1.) you're arguing a CLASSIC slippery slope.
2.) there are those out there who prefer to catch their own food. Who the hell are you to decide someone's food intake?
3.) "don't want to play GI Joe" shows your opinion of Armed Service Personnel. Three Bronx cheers for you, on that one.

...As long as electronics are available, I'm never unarmed...

[slackmaster]

56. You are desperately out of tune with the thinking of a majority of US voters on this

It's pathetic.

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. Mistake

And slippery slope.

[Bake]

63. Are you including semi-auto handguns in the "today" category?

They fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. So does a revolver. So what's the difference? And do you want to snatch up all the revolvers too?

The devil's in the details. And the definitions.

Bake

[obamanut2012]

95. Yes, the OP says they want to ban all guns

[Jenoch]

80. What is your plan to

actually round up all of the semi-auto guns? (And later all handguns, and later all the rest)?

[obamanut2012]

15. .....

+1

[WastedSaint]

19. I've read your posts. Obviously you're on the pro gun side. No wonder you don't like the ugly

truth.

[former-republican]

21. I missed your post , I agree

[RomneyLies]

26. .

+1

It was obvious

[former-republican]

8. I won't support a ban on bolt action rifles

[slackmaster]

9. Same here. About 80% of my collection consists of bolt-action rifles.

[former-republican]

14. For me it's pretty much the only type of target shooting I do

Occasional handgun also but I have gotten in to precision shooting for the last 10 years or so.

[oneshooter]

100. I shoot HighPower

Use a Nat Match M1 Garand in 308.

[WastedSaint]

28. If the party plaform was amended to ban sniper rifles, would you still vote Democratic? nt

[slackmaster]

30. I'd vote for sane, reasonable Democrats who opposed that plank in the platform

[obamanut2012]

44. There it is

[slackmaster]

58. Yes, there it is. I wonder how many of us can see this for what it is?

It's quite obvious to me as well.

[obamanut2012]

61. Yup

[WastedSaint]

13. They're all just as deadly. Also the average hunting bolt action has 2-3x the power of an AR15 round

How many kindergarteners will a 30-06 from a 1903 Springfield go through?

[former-republican]

16. I stated what I support

[obamanut2012]

17. Oh, I get what you're saying

Trust me. It is very obvious what you are saying.

[WastedSaint]

27. If the party plaform was amended to ban sniper rifles, would you still vote Democratic? nt

[former-republican]

37. There's no such thing as a sniper rifle but I think you know that already...

[WastedSaint]

48. "There's no such thing as an Assault Rifle either." Is that what you're going to say next? nt

[former-republican]

53. "There's no such thing as an Assault Rifle either"

Actually there is , better go and read up on it .
I know what you're doing .

[etherealtruth]

20. It is a start

[WastedSaint]

31. A little justice in this thread so far as well.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your alert

Mail Message
At Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:01 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

Err, I believe a bridge has a lonely spot waiting..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2022188

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

YOUR COMMENTS:

implying that OP is a troll for speaking the truth. Hide this NRA filth. No more dead kids.

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:09 PM, and voted 5-1 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: Suicide suggestions are not welcome on DU. Hit the road.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: It's rude to dismiss an OP because the poster is new to DU. Hide.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: I'm usually inclined to let these go because this is such a highly charged topic, but "I believe a bridge has a lonely spot waiting"? WTF?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

Thank you.

[a geek named Bob]

34. The only justice in your post

is mob justice.

[WastedSaint]

35. It's open season on the NRA now. No bag limit. nt

[a geek named Bob]

38. So you're for mob justice

Nice to know you don't believe in the rule of law...

Let me guess... anyone disagreeing with you is parroting the RW/NRA talking points.

Go look up the word "Demagogue" and get back to me.

[WastedSaint]

45. This is a Democratic Discussion board, gun nuttery is not welcome. You're precious is

in danger of being taken by people who don't want their kids killed by it and that scares you. I laugh.

[a geek named Bob]

55. This is an open discussion board

Your constant refrains of demogoguery (sp) aren't welcome.

Who the hell are you to determine what people can or can't say on an open thread?

I laugh at your attempts at propaganda...

[Bake]

75. I don't think you've been here long enough to tell anyone what's welcome and what's not.

I, on the other hand, have been here since 2001. Since the beginning. And your welcome is wearing a little thin.

Bake

[etherealtruth]

43. That is great and welcome

It is good to have you here!

[RomneyLies]

65. Had I been on the jury, I would have voted to Leave It Alone

Out of principle.

[Bake]

72. So now we're hiding posts that take any position other than "take all the guns away." Sweet.

This is supposed to be a DISCUSSION forum. It's turning into an echo chamber for the extremists.

For the record, I would support an assault weapons ban.

I would not support a ban on what you refer to as "sniper rifles" (which appears to be any rifle with a scope). There actually IS such a thing as a .50 cal sniper rifle with a high-powered scope, like the ones used by millitary snipers. The scope alone costs about $2K. The rifle is about $10K. Your garden variety psycho can't afford it, and it hasn't been used in any mass killing that I know of, so there's not much point in banning it, but if you must, fine. It's designed to hit a target a mile away.

I would not support a ban on semi-auto handguns, nor would I support a ban on revolvers.

Alert on me if you want. Call me an NRA shill (I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the NRA, and I don't support most of its agenda). If a jury finds this post objectionable and hides it, that will tell me all I need to know about the current state of DU. In fact, please do alert on this post. I WANT to see if a jury hides it.

Bake

[former-republican]

79. " There actually IS such a thing as a .50 cal sniper rifle with a high-powered scope"

You're talking about the Barrett M107 anti material rifle.

There are no sniper rifles.

[Bake]

83. All I know is it's the one used by the military snipers.

I hear it'll bring down an airplane too.

Bake

[former-republican]

87. That's a stretch but yes the design of the rifle was to engage and disable material targets

[cherokeeprogressive]

86. To the jurors who didn't understand the bridge reference...

I'm pretty sure the hidden post was referencing trolls.

[RomneyLies]

32. See, this is how those who want gun control lose the debate.

You have fairly moderate people, like me, who have been fine with gun ownership for most of their lives though they own no guns. People like me saw the Sandy Hook tragedy and said, "something must be done, let's ban weapons based upon two factors, muzzle velocity and firing rate. Let's also ban all magazines over ten rounds. This is sensible."

Then somebody wants to add hunting rifles to the mix and people like me are like, "whoa, back off. Let's just stop right now and reconsider this whole gun control thing."

Thanks for making me think twice about the rationality of banning any guns.

[a geek named Bob]

36. Okay...

I'm not talking about doing that right now. I'm talking about getting the AR's and semi-autos now.
Then a little later we go after the other stuff. We can't get it all at once, but that's how you eat an elephant. One bite at a time.

Your post stands as prime evidence that you want to ban ALL guns. Sorry, I see no reason to trust my safety to someone like you.

A sniper rifle can inflict death from afar on a large scale. How many dead kids are OK to you?

A deer rifle is lot different from a sniper rifle. Maybe you should throttle back on the bombast...

[WastedSaint]

51. What's the difference between a deer rifle and a sniper rifle?

Both are accurate and deadly at long range. Both have scopes. Both are usually .30 cal + in bullet diameter.

They are the same. Anything else is NRA lies.

[a geek named Bob]

59. sigh...

so you would prefer to subject multiple thousands of people to your whims on how to get their own food.

Who elected you philosopher-king?

The problem isn't the guns, it's letting crazy people have access to the guns.

YOU don't get to determine MY actions.

(there seems to be a pernicious meme around these parts... something on the order of "I get to say what other people should do." If I were to follow that, all potheads within a 50 block radius of my lab should be placed under physical restraints.)

[RomneyLies]

46. If that's the plan, count me out on banning anything now.

You want it all, fine.

I now oppose banning any.

[RegieRocker]

64. They don't get it

fortunately they are a minority. Vocal yes but still a minority. Most Democrats such as you and I will oppose a full ban. The road they are traveling will lead to a dead end. It always has and always will unless some shady stuff is involved. They have lived in the cities and don't understand rural life at all or have forgotten. In some areas of the country it is quite dangerous due to wild animals. They live in a cocoon.

[RomneyLies]

69. Two things matter in these massacres, muzzle velocity and rate of fire.

If legislation is written banning based upon those two principles in combination, real action will have been taken.

Adding magazine capacity limitations helps as well.

The last bit is there can be no grandfathering of existing weapons and magazines.

Those points would form REAL reform, but I guess it's not enough for some people.

[RegieRocker]

76. There is one thing they understand:

a 10 bullet clip on a non assault rifle will kill 10 people. A person can change a clip in 2 secs. This they believe: The only way to stop gun violence is to go house to house and search for guns and seize and destroy them. This they don't understand. This can not and will not happen. Even if it did happen many would hide their weapons especially criminals. Lanza had 10 minutes since no one else there could defend themselves. The only thing that limited his time was the first responders. It is impossible to charge a dead person with a felony. That is the truth.

[pop topcan]

94. I doubt your "no grandfathering" idea would pass Constitutional muster against Ex Post Facto laws

in Article 1. The venerable .45 ACP is one of the 'slowest' bullets around, it can certainly be effective as the US military surely has known for 70 years since they started issuing them and the guns that use them.
I have a revolver with an 11 shot cylinder...would you 'ban' that too? Retrospectively?

[Bake]

81. I'm just about there too.

If it's "we're doing this now as a start, and we'll get the rest later," that's not gonna fly with me or with anybody I know.

And I was willing to ban assault rifles. But he wants Dad's deer rifle now.

Bake

[RegieRocker]

89. They won't stop until we have NO guns

period.

[cliffordu]

47. So wtf do think a sniper rifle IS??

Maybe a quick check in the Wikipedia would help you out.....

[Vinnie From Indy]

40. Agent Provocateur perhaps?

Cheers!

[a geek named Bob]

41. I've got beer and pizza money that says you are correct, sir.

[Vinnie From Indy]

49. This guy is as subtle as a hurricane.

Cheers to you my friend!

[a geek named Bob]

52. Thank you for the cheers

we can negotiate on the beer and pizza later.

[slackmaster]

60. I have many experiences!

[a geek named Bob]

68. That episode convinced me to keep spares around

that, and catalog my books! (working on that last one...)

[slackmaster]

73. I keep spare eyeglass too even though mine are VERY expensive

I have the entire collection of the original Twilight Zone on DVD - Got for about $200 from Time-Warner. Very good deal.

[a geek named Bob]

77. okay... another item for my want list... n/t

[slackmaster]

78. I bought the full set of Get Smart too.

Another $200 well spent.

[a geek named Bob]

82. I haven't seen Get Smart in ages (I won't count the movie as part of the series...)

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

96. re: "I haven't seen Get Smart in ages"

Sorry about that chief.

[a geek named Bob]

97. great show, great subtext...

I need ot trot down to the local video store and rent the set (my local video place was voted best in CT.)

[Glassunion]

62. HA! +1

[jpak]

71. yup

and fail

[slackmaster]

74. Let me consult my old Magic 8-Ball, Vinnie

[Marrah_G]

98. Bingo

[ProdigalJunkMail]

54. wow... fuck all those people who hunt for food...

what an idiotic post...

sP

[Bake]

85. And if you live in the country and have coyotes nearby, you're just outta luck.

So don't let your dog outside.

Bake

[RegieRocker]

90. or your kids.

There are plenty of wild animals that are a risk to humans other than coyotes.

[Bake]

91. True, of course.

I was just using that as an example.



Bake

[Puzzledtraveller]

57. Yes, and all the gangs and drug cartels that operate in the US

will hand them over or not resist if taken by force? Even if people voluntarily complied and or did not resist seizure you thinking about average americans. I bet there are far more not so average americans with guns than just john and jane doe living in the burbs. Get real.

[hobbit709]

66. since he didn't get what he wanted here and got locked out, he took it to the Gungeon.

[SpartanDem]

84. Sniper rifle? Give me a break

take your stupid zealotry somewhere else.

[kestrel91316]

92. Nope, sorry. My dad had a deer rifle that he used for hunting deer.

I'd venture a guess that most of my cousins have the same. Hunting is legal and should stay legal, in large part because we have eliminated most of the large land predators in the US.

No magazines over 5 rounds. This was proposed to me by a DUer who HAS guns.

[hobbit709]

102. WastedSaint is now MIRTedSaint.

[Paladin]

103. Good. This Thread Was A Gift To Our Resident Gun Enthusiasts. (nt)