Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

DanAK47

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    393

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by DanAK47

  1. Posted

    There is no "experience" to prove assault weapons cause a crime epidemic..

    You don't trust people with guns, because they allegedly use them to commit murder (let me remind you that this is illegal), but you trust them to not commit a much less illegal act in purchasing an illegal firearm.

    Maybe you will say that if they are restricted, it will be much harder for the common man to get hold of them. Well, what about marijuana?

  3. Posted

    Yes, that is the M14A2. It just says M14 because the name is defined in the magazines and not the weapon part of the config..

    I took the aimpoint covers off because they look crappy in the iron sight view. The Killflash is there on the model and in the optics though.

  8. Posted

    I've talked to some cops and they agree that "cop organizations" are not for cops at all.

    They scoff when people say that all cops are for the AWB. Most of them like assault weapons.

    1/4th of police are killed with automatic weapons?

    Maybe you mean semi-automatic.

    Full auto weapons are illegal.

    The last murder with a full automatic weapon was commited by a police officer, in the 70s, I think.

    The deadliness of assault weapons is somewhat exaggerated with reguards to the deadliness of other, more "humble" weapons.. If you truly want to reduce crime you are going in the wrong direction. Studies show that most crimes are commited with illegally purchased revolvers.. Ban them if you care about the facts and not hypothetical situations..

  10. Posted

    If you live in Belgium what do you know about the violence in America?

    Seriously, the "violence" here gets blown way out of proportion.

    60% of people here don't know anything about weapons and think that if the AWB goes away, the streets will be flooded with Uzis.

    Blake, since you are bowwing out, I will try not to say anything that provokes you to respond. But the lethal injection example is something that is clearly designed to kill people and has no other use. That is what is being said about guns.

  11. Posted

    I don't see anything different in your post. I like guns because they are fun to shoot.

    In reply to that I was told that if they are fun, they are looked at as toys. Ha.

    Most of the anti-gun argument here seems to be based on feelings... You "feel" you are in danger because someone has a gun.

    That or because they are designed to kill.. So is lethal injection. Are you afraid that someone is going to take you away and stick the needle in you for no reason?

  12. Posted

    The AWB did nothing to regulate class III automatic weapons. That's a different law.

    The AWB only made it illegal to manufacture weapons with more than a certain number of "scary" cosmetic features.

    Blake - There are varying degrees of "Temper issues." Apparently this one was enough of a problem to get him fired. I think his friends said there was something wrong with him.

    You seem to think everyone here is armed to the teeth. Chances are nobody would even confront the robber. There are not police officers sitting around every bank waiting for it to be robbed. They can not protect you from everything.

    Even if an armed person was there I highly doubt it would turn into the wild west shootout you mentioned.

    Is there any particular reason you believe an average person on the street would like to kill you? Are you paranoid?

    But of course, police and security guards should be the only people to carry guns. I thought guns caused crime? They are designed to kill people, so why would someone who wants to keep the peace carry one? Besides, a criminal could easily steal it from him.

  13. Posted

    I brought it up but you seem emotionally attached to it.

    Did you even bother to read any of those pages I linked to?

    Blake, the person was not normal before this. I saw something about it on TV. He had serious temper issues that were known about. Warning signs..

    He was actually going to go shoot up his workplace, but got lazy and went to the McDonalds instead.

    Someone with a handgun would probably have it concealed and would not be "nervously looking around." Most people here are not so gunshy.

    As if you have something to fear from a person anyway. Some of you act like a random guy would like to kill you, and as long as he doesn't have a gun, that's okay.

  14. Posted

    I have done some googling and came up with several links related to the "suitcase nuke." Hopefully this will clear it up.

    http://www.techcentralstation.com/040104C.html

    Quote[/b] ]The closest the U.S. is known to have come to a "suitcase" or hand-carried weapon was a variation of the W-54 called, interestingly enough, the SADM (small atomic demolition munition). This device -- officially the Mk-54 -- would have required a mighty big suitcase. It was a fat cylinder, 15 inches (diameter) by 24 inches, not unlike one of those big plastic buckets you can buy bulk paint in at Home Depot, and it weighed 150 pounds.
    Quote[/b] ]The infamous Soviet-made suitcase bombs that supposedly disappeared from inventory sometime after the break-up of the Soviet Union have been the subject of numerous investigations and much fevered speculation. It is known that the Soviets, like the United States, developed small nuclear munitions, small enough to be fired in artillery shells or to be hand-carried (by one or more soldiers) as a demolition device. If they designed and built one that could actually fit in a large brief case, one of them has not shown up anywhere, nor has an official photograph or blueprint of it.

    http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/News/Lebedbomb.html

    Scroll down and you can see the picture you posted with caption:

    Quote[/b] ]Mock-up of a hypothetical "suitcase" nuclear bomb, made by Congressional

    staffer Peter Pry. It is basically a 105 mm artillery shell device packaged in a

    large briefcase.

    Possible? Sure. Real? Doubtable.

    It seems that Lebed, the person who stirred up the first rumors of the Soviet suitcase bombs, was doing so for his own political agenda. He was fired.

  16. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]don't produce deadly effect by themselves

    That is irrelevant if you are saying a car is less complicated.

    Quote[/b] ]pops out a kevlar shield out from its barrel instead of a bullet and protect the shooter, then it protects the shooter.

    More of a symptom solution like someone was talking about earlier.

    It does not eliminate the threat.

    "Designed to kill" yes, but why was it designed to kill?

  18. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]your argument was that a gun has a lot less part, and thus is safer.

    I specifically said controls. Blinkers, parking brakes, they are controls. I did not say a gun had less parts.

    Marines had M16s, similar to the weapon that was used in the massacre, and were killed by armed resistors.

    The .44 comment was sarcasm.

    I could argue that the assault rifle was created to keep the user alive, not explicitly to kill other people. So you could say it is designed to keep you safe.

    SADM is not a suitcase nuke.

    My source is something an EOD tech has posted.

  20. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]a car only needs two things steering wheel, and pedals(clutches added if you want to).

    I hope you don't ever change lanes, back up, drive in inclement weather, drive in the dark, or park.

    Maybe the suitcase nuke is feasible. Maybe it isn't. You are not a nuclear scientist and neither am I. I trust my source more than that web site, official or not.

    As for the McDonalds massacre, maybe it wouldn't of happened if more citizens were armed and could shoot back at criminals.

    And the .44? I guess we should ban those too? After all, someone could make a mistake with one. We should ban computers while we are at it.

  22. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]using an A-bomb is not complicated.
    Quote[/b] ]if it's not complicated, you can make one?

    You can drive, right? A car is more complicated to operate than most guns. If you don't know how to operate a gun, leave it the hell alone. (By the way, I read that the suitcase nuke was bogus and does not exist.)

    shin, I do not know where you heard your .44 magnum story, but they do not have magazines and I highly doubt a first-timer with a woman's hands could double tap a revolver, which have heavy triggers. I suppose it would be the gun's fault either way right? Just like it's the car's fault if you rear end someone.

    Quote[/b] ]then your mind is defective and you should not own a firearm.

    Gee, thanks. Look out for me.

  24. Posted

    And the abuse of the gun isn't what contributes to accidents?

    I would be more worried about something that actually does alter how your brain works than something that appears to be dangerous.

    How can you argue that a gun is too complicated for a person to use when it has less controls than a car?

    Enjoying shooting does not make you think of it as a toy. That is an insulting assumption.

    The primary purpose of something is dependent on the type of person using it. If my "assault weapon" is supposed to make me want to kill people, it is defective.

  25. Posted

    This thread is getting hard to read.

    Anyway,

    If the criminal has a gun on you first it would be stupid to try and draw on him, and vice versa. You give criminals way too much credit. Even if they have overwhelming odds there is still a chance that one of their pals will get shot and die. Why take the risk when there are dozens of homes without gun owners, security systems, or dogs?

    As for substance A and B, the per death ratio is the same with each substance. My example is similar to guns and alcohol.

    Alcohol is designed to get you drunk. People act stupid when they are drunk. You buy alcohol to get wasted. Alcohol causes more deaths than guns do.

    Guns are designed to kill, from the musket to the Uzi. People buy them for various reasons. I would say the reason most people buy civilian versions of assault rifles is because they are fun to shoot. Guns cause less deaths than alcohol.

    "Guns are bad". "They kill people". So do sports cars. But when used responsibly they are both a lot of fun.

    You say guns cause murder.

    Why would someone who plans to MURDER someone, an offense punishable by death, life in prison, etc, stop and say "I won't do it, because it's illegal to buy X weapon, I could pay a fine if I get caught."

×