Mass Shooting At Maine Pool Hall & Bowling Alley

Status
Not open for further replies.

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I remember when it took skill to shoot a gun, one bullet a time. It was about safety training, gun maintenance, how to stand aim, using the sights. Today no skill required, just spray the bullets. I guess we should make hand grenades legal.
still requires everything you mention. spraying bullets is nothing new. back in the day BAR's(the real ones) and Thompson SMG's were legal and available in hardware stores. as i said earlier if this wingnut had a Glock(or any hi-cap pistol) and a few mags he could have done just as much damage. do they think they're going ban them too? yeah right.
 
Last edited:

23DenaliBDE

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
So what was the first thing you killed?
Squirrel, followed by rabbit, quail, pheasant, whitetail. That doesn't count gopher, because I don't eat them, only kill them when they become a problem. It also does not count pig, because every pig I shot and butchered was not wild
 

straightline

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If you're referring to revolvers, they can be 5, 6, 7, and now 8. Or you can get a Glock 9mm pistol with an
extended magazine holding 33+1. I don't have the 8. (yet)
Yeah the 45 ish pistols have been on tv for a while. But this 8 shooter; I thought he had the arithmetic wrong. Hyper speed math...
 

BasementDweller

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I believe it would be the same. AAMOF, I think they would be appalled by the actions that the people allow the government to get away with. They new the future would bring advancement it technology, just as we know it today. They couldn't envision automobiles, but they seen new machines being invented, and new the future could hold any array of advancement. These men were not stupid.

Remember, they were at war with the British. Who of which DID disarm the citizenry in the areas they occupied. The founders also said we don't have to be forced to harbor soldiers in our homes. Isn't that still a good idea today? Is free speech still a good idea? The powers that be are trying to quench that even today. What about the right to unlawful search and seizure? Another tactic used be the British. You see, the founders were far more educated the most people today. As a matter of fact, they had nore common sense then 90% of people today. They weren't pegans.
I respect the founders intelligence more than most people, but you totally ignored my point regarding mental health. This is something we understand a bit more about than we did in the past. Although, you could argue that previous generations may have dealt with the mentally ill in a manner that was much safer for the public, while being draconian towards those suffering.

I know there are a lot of variables at play here, but there has to be a better way of keeping weapons out of the hands of unstable people, especially unstable mentally-ill young men. 90 plus percent of the pro 2A crowd, of which I'm one, have a line in the sand somewhere. My neighbor having a shoulder-fired nuclear rocket seems to be well across the line for me. A pistol is not. So where's the line? Seems like reasonable people could find a line somewhere. But I'm not as concerned with the weapon of choice as much as I am who has access to them.
 

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
It's only a .22 but the S&W 617 is 10 rounds.
Thanks, and you just reminded me of a .22lr revolver that I bought for my wife because she has
trouble racking most of the slides. It's a Ruger LCR 8 round. Low recoil also with .22.
I'm not opposed to .22lr with many thinking and saying it's too weak a round. John Hinkley took
out 4 men and almost killed President Reagan while rapid firing a .22lr like Yosemite Sam. It will
kill, and did. James Brady eventually died over the years from the head shot he received.
 
Last edited:

David in FL

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I respect the founders intelligence more than most people, but you totally ignored my point regarding mental health. This is something we understand a bit more about than we did in the past. Although, you could argue that previous generations may have dealt with the mentally ill in a manner that was much safer for the public, while being draconian towards those suffering.

I know there are a lot of variables at play here, but there has to be a better way of keeping weapons out of the hands of unstable people, especially unstable mentally-ill young men. 90 plus percent of the pro 2A crowd, of which I'm one, have a line in the sand somewhere. My neighbor having a shoulder-fired nuclear rocket seems to be well across the line for me. A pistol is not. So where's the line? Seems like reasonable people could find a line somewhere. But I'm not as concerned with the weapon of choice as much as I am who has access to them.

The problem with "drawing the line" is that people want to draw the line based on those items that bad people use to do bad things.

They use those items rather than shoulder fired nuclear rockets because they have access to them.

Take away those things and they will use other remaining things that they have access to.

Guess where this finally ends up...
 

logical

Loose Rack
Silver Member
Thanks, and you just reminded me of a .22lr revolver that I bought for my wife because she has
trouble racking most of the slides. It's a Ruger LCR 8 round. Low recoil also with .22.
I had the Taurus version (copy) of the S&W that was a 9-shot. It had misfire issues but as a pinker it was just an inconvenience.

I'm not sure why so many "experts" on here don't know even basic information about guns made on the last 75 years. A 13-18 shot 9mm is pretty much a standard semi-auto pistol made by a dozen different companies. Banning rifles that meet some arbitrary set of rules based mostly on appearance is not of any value.
 

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
I had the Taurus version (copy) of the S&W that was a 9-shot. It had misfire issues but as a pinker it was just an inconvenience.
I can't speak for that particular Taurus, but they have really made some major strides since moving the manufacturing to here in the states. Much better quality control on everything. The older guns made outside of the states were hit or miss.
Kel-Tec can really put out some unreliable junk. Lesson learned.
I'm not sure why so many "experts" on here don't know even basic information about guns made on the last 75 years. A 13-18 shot 9mm is pretty much a standard semi-auto pistol made by a dozen different companies. Banning rifles that meet some arbitrary set of rules based mostly on appearance is not of any value.
It's partially due to the AR in front of the number. It does NOT stand for "automatic rifle". Yet, they keep referring to it as such and want a total BAN.

Unfortunately, certain states have limited the magazine capacity to 10. It's only a matter of time before it goes lower.
Here are the states with requirements (some slightly higher than 10): California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. Four of these states (DE, RI, OR, and WA) enacted these laws in 2022 and Illinois did so in January 2023
 

joninnorfolk

Account was hacked - Pending verification
Silver Member
Is anyone in this discussion empowered to determine what another is allowed to own or the manner they choose to defend themselves (and others)?

Can anyone grant to another a right that they don't already have themselves?

If the claimed to be "just government" is derived from the consent of the people, where does empowerment to do those things come from, if not from legislative magic?
 

logical

Loose Rack
Silver Member
Is anyone in this discussion empowered to determine what another is allowed to own or the manner they choose to defend themselves (and others)?

Can anyone grant to another a right that they don't already have themselves?

If the claimed to be "just government" is derived from the consent of the people, where does empowerment to do those things come from, if not from legislative magic?
I'm sure you just changed all of their minds.
 

joninnorfolk

Account was hacked - Pending verification
Silver Member
Doubtful. Intellectual honesty is far too lofty an expectation from any flavor of the voting cattle.
 

23DenaliBDE

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Doubtful. Intellectual honesty is far too lofty an expectation from any flavor of the voting cattle.
Intellectual honesty.............This is too easy, but what the heck. 1. Can you please tell us the difference between honesty/truth and "intellectual honesty." 2. Do you even know where our rights come from?
 

measureman

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
My father jumped numerous times, high and low altitude, and helicopters. He doesn’t like guns. The ones he brought back, are kept at my home, he won’t have them around.
A lot of people don't like guns but when the bad guys try to kick your door down you soon have a new love of guns.
Imagine standing there helpless to defend your home and loved ones when the police are only minutes or more away,not me I'm blasting them.

Switzerland practices universal conscription, which requires that all able-bodied male citizens keep fully automatic firearms at home in case of a call-up.
 

buckshotshoey

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I respect the founders intelligence more than most people, but you totally ignored my point regarding mental health. This is something we understand a bit more about than we did in the past. Although, you could argue that previous generations may have dealt with the mentally ill in a manner that was much safer for the public, while being draconian towards those suffering.

I know there are a lot of variables at play here, but there has to be a better way of keeping weapons out of the hands of unstable people, especially unstable mentally-ill young men. 90 plus percent of the pro 2A crowd, of which I'm one, have a line in the sand somewhere. My neighbor having a shoulder-fired nuclear rocket seems to be well across the line for me. A pistol is not. So where's the line? Seems like reasonable people could find a line somewhere. But I'm not as concerned with the weapon of choice as much as I am who has access to them.
True. And I agree. But punishing me is not going to solve the problem. Making me jump through government red tape, and let the decision up to a government official, that by the way probably has no clue about the firearm in question...which they base their perception from a movie out of crap ass Hollywood. Take western films for example... 99% of westerns a puely for entertainment value, but has little basis on how it really was. Its not going to solve the problem.

I'll tell you what the founders would do to murders... they would try them and hang em. Not what the pansy ass prosecutors of today do.

What about red flag laws? Your guns can be taken away without one bit of due process. Even if the claims are completely false, you will spend tens of thousands to get them back... in maybe 3 to 5 years. This is completely against the rights of an American citizen, yet its happening.
 

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A lot of people don't like guns but when the bad guys try to kick your door down you soon have a new love of guns.
Imagine standing there helpless to defend your home and loved ones when the police are only minutes or more away,not me I'm blasting them.

Switzerland practices universal conscription, which requires that all able-bodied male citizens keep fully automatic firearms at home in case of a call-up.
They don't get ammo tho. That's kept at local/regional arsenals in case of a call-up.
 

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
True. And I agree. But punishing me is not going to solve the problem. Making me jump through government red tape, and let the decision up to a government official, that by the way probably has no clue about the firearm in question...which they base their perception from a movie out of crap ass Hollywood. Take western films for example... 99% of westerns a puely for entertainment value, but has little basis on how it really was. Its not going to solve the problem.

I'll tell you what the founders would do to murders... they would try them and hang em. Not what the pansy ass prosecutors of today do.

What about red flag laws? Your guns can be taken away without one bit of due process. Even if the claims are completely false, you will spend tens of thousands to get them back... in maybe 3 to 5 years. This is completely against the rights of an American citizen, yet its happening.
Not a fan of so-called 'Gun ViolenceRestrainingOrders' either but there is due process involved. Person can appear in court to give their side and the orders, if granted, are not always permanent. Usually another hearing takes place. No fan of them but this is how they work.Best way to me is to allow access to HIPAA health backgrounds. Some people should not have access to firearms. There is not a totally painless way to get there but its possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top