E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Welcome to the E46Fanatics forums. E46Fanatics is the premiere website for BMW 3 series owners around the world with interactive forums, a geographical enthusiast directory, photo galleries, and technical information for BMW enthusiasts.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Everything Else > The Off-Topic > Political Talk

Political Talk
You may discuss anything regarding politics in this forum ONLY. If you cannot respect others opinions, your access to this forum will be removed.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-11-2013, 06:01 AM   #41
5ynd1cat3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 496
My Ride: swagger wagon
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdyaman View Post
Just curious here, but what exactly do you need an assualt rifle in the urban/city area of Maryland of which you live?
Need is irrelevant. There are lots of things people don't necessarily need. You don't need those shoes, these shoes will work just fine for you. I wouldn't want to dictate to you what to do with your life just as I wouldn't want you to dictate to me. If you think the government will stop once they get what they want regarding 2A, you're kidding yourself.

Speaking if 2A, I never hear anyone say anything about how not only would any type of confiscation be a 2A infringement but it would also be a 14A infringement. Of course any type of confiscation would be impossible not only from a legislative standpoint but also an enforcement standpoint.

Sent from my HTC Glacier using Bimmer App
__________________
5ynd1cat3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 06:07 AM   #42
phrozen06
Registered User
 
phrozen06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 3927'33"N 7758'04"W
Posts: 7,539
My Ride: E46, E92 M3, R32 VW
Send a message via Yahoo to phrozen06
"The republic will rise again" -Alex Jones-
__________________



Last edited by phrozen06; 01-11-2013 at 06:10 AM.
phrozen06 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 06:18 AM   #43
MDydinanM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Coast
Posts: 754
My Ride: is a ///M
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ynd1cat3 View Post
Need is irrelevant. There are lots of things people don't necessarily need. You don't need those shoes, these shoes will work just fine for you. I wouldn't want to dictate to you what to do with your life just as I wouldn't want you to dictate to me. If you think the government will stop once they get what they want regarding 2A, you're kidding yourself.


Sent from my HTC Glacier using Bimmer App
I can understand why members here are misunderstanding my post. It was a joke and snide/sarcastic remark directed at Chase, in line with this joke:

Quote:
Originally Posted by simsima325 View Post
If banning ARs keeps one out of your hands, I'd support the ban.
Here I clarified:

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showpos...8&postcount=33


Tough crowd in here...

Last edited by MDydinanM; 01-11-2013 at 07:01 AM.
MDydinanM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 07:52 AM   #44
2000_328CI
DK Jack Sparrow
 
2000_328CI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Isla de Muerta | DC/VA
Posts: 29,029
My Ride: 328Ci | Range Rover
Send a message via AIM to 2000_328CI Send a message via MSN to 2000_328CI
Quote:
Originally Posted by badfast View Post
Certainly doesn't mean we should downplay these mass shootings as you seem to be doing.

What should we do about the gang violence?
Look the school shootings ARE a problem but the cause of those isn't the weapons. Do you think the kid in the shooting just yesterday decided to do so because he had an arch nemesis on campus? Of course not. He got the idea by the non stop coverage of the Sandy Hook shooter.... these guys get vilified in the media as if they're Darth Vader so naturally a kid who is desperate and lonely is going to go that route if they think their life isn't worth a damn....

But to focus on the school shootings and make the argument around ARs it goes to show the insincerity of those pushing for gun control.. they aren't going after the real problem (pistols in the cities) but rather attacking ARs because it's an easy target given the school visuals. I'm sorry but that's bogus.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lair View Post
No, it didn't ban AR's. Please stop spreading the gun lobby's lies.
I was referring to the Chicago ban and the further ban that Rahm is proposing
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdyaman View Post
Just curious here, but what exactly do you need an assualt rifle in the urban/city area of Maryland of which you live?
Enjoyment. Target shooting, range fun, going to my family's farm and shooting hundreds of yards for entertainment with friends. The possibility of a Mayan apocalypse or home introducers. As of late, the main driver has been the fact that the left has been looking to ban my ability to own one... if you said that starting tomorrow you can't buy cars because the horsepower has gone too high and people are dying exponentially in car crashes, guess what people would go buy today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdyaman View Post
Are you offended on Chase's behalf?
.......

why don't you ask Chase
Why the need for posting pictures?

And what on earth does my appearance have to do with me deciding I want to purchase a firearm. This is exactly what those in favor of gun control have been shaking their heads at the entire debate. Rather than logic or facts you just twist the argument into a personal grudge match.... oh chase doesn't need a firearm because he's tall and has long blonde hair???
__________________

435 Horsepower 328Ci
Everything you need to know on muffler deletes : http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?t=745244
Wrapping an E46 in Vinyl : http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthr...ghlight=bronze
2000_328CI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 08:03 AM   #45
'busa
Registered User
 
'busa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 1,465
My Ride: E90 335i (sold)
Home introducers? What harm have they done?

And you're not blonde, Chase. You know it, we know it. Embrace it.
__________________
'busa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 08:09 AM   #46
2000_328CI
DK Jack Sparrow
 
2000_328CI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Isla de Muerta | DC/VA
Posts: 29,029
My Ride: 328Ci | Range Rover
Send a message via AIM to 2000_328CI Send a message via MSN to 2000_328CI
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
Home introducers? What harm have they done?

And you're not blonde, Chase. You know it, we know it. Embrace it.
Why is it that buying a weapon for self defense is at all out of the norm?

Not blonde? Get your eyes checked broseph
__________________

435 Horsepower 328Ci
Everything you need to know on muffler deletes : http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?t=745244
Wrapping an E46 in Vinyl : http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthr...ghlight=bronze
2000_328CI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 09:41 AM   #47
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 914
My Ride: 2003 FormulaRedS2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdyaman View Post
Difference? aside from the fact both fire bullets and are lethal?

I'll entertain your post (without goolge-fu and rely on my memory from service). In sum, AR's typically require the use of two hands and a person's shoulder to steady the weapon where as handguns can be used with one hand (however typically two hands are used for support/stability when firing a handgun). Then there are physical characteristics, size, weight, etc. Other differences include magazine capacity - though I realize there is magazine capacity limit for civilian use. Next is the type of munition used such as 9mm vs 5.56. ARs and handguns also differ in range and accuracy, depending on type and model. Then there are the roles of each weapon, where in a military context, hands guns are used for scenarios such as close quarters or a last resort, where as ARs are used to project firepower at range (e.g. M16 max effective range for an area target is 800m and point target at 550m). Also, in a strictly military context where fully automatic weapons exist, rifles have different rates of fire where, for example, you can select three round burst or single rate of fire. Handguns, as with the standard issue M9 Beretta have a single rate of fire.

At the end of the day, as I previously mentioned, they both fire bullets and are lethal. To add, AR and handguns that are in compliance with US law for civilian use, have a single rate of fire unless the person has a Class 3 license (that is if I recall correctly). However, I think member Rhumb put it best in a prior post,that it is perhaps the intangible (or tangible depending on how you define it) degree of efficiency an AR or handgun can inflict damage or harm. The last sentence being an opinion, not necessarily a fact.
Excellent. You seem to have a decent grasp on the subject, far better than most anti gun liberals. Great.

Now lets proceed. What round does more damage to a human, a 223 or a .45acp hollow point....or even a 9mm HP. Lets also keep in mind that a bullet is even more lethal when lodged.
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 10:19 AM   #48
Lair
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sea level
Posts: 321
My Ride: e90, cheap Boxster
Why is chase fixated on Piers Morgan? Nobody gaf about Piers Morgan.
__________________

Quote:
It's the best years of your life they want to steal.
Congratulations.
Lair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 10:30 AM   #49
bimmerfan08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: I'm alive
Posts: 4,889
My Ride: E46 M3
Chase has blondish hair. Just sayin'
__________________
bimmerfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 12:16 PM   #50
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc View Post
Now lets proceed. What round does more damage to a human, a 223 or a .45acp hollow point....or even a 9mm HP. Lets also keep in mind that a bullet is even more lethal when lodged.
As the saying goes: Guns don't kill people, bullets do.

We could let people own all the guns they want, and outlaw the owning of bullets. After all, the 2nd Am is the right to keep and bear arms, not the right to keep and bear projectiles.

The fact of the matter remains, it has been ruled by the SCOTUS that restrictions on the possession of certain guns is constitutionally acceptable. As I recall, the AW ban put in place under the Clinton admin was upheld as constitutional as well. So there is constitutional precedent for such a ban.

So to those that say any type of AW ban is a violation of the 2nd amendment, I would suggest you look back at when this constitutional question has been raised before. The results may surprise you. But, that may be to much work, rather than a knee jerk reaction not based on reality.

And for those, like that "CEO", it is a pity that if an AW ban is imposed under previous constraints ruled as constitutional by SCOTUS, they would gladly violate the constitution and the constitutional rights of all citizens. After all, actions in violation of the constitutional powers of the judicial branch, Article III of the constitution, violates the constitutional rights of all citizens. But, they seem ignorant of that portion of the constitution. It appears for these people, ignorance is bliss, and that is truly pitiable.
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 12:29 PM   #51
casino is no lie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: CDT
Posts: 76
My Ride: M54B30
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2000_328CI View Post
Why is it that buying a weapon for self defense is at all out of the norm?
A carbine is not an ideal choice for self-defense. A shotgun or handgun is far superior in most situations.
__________________
casino is no lie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 12:34 PM   #52
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 581
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc View Post
Excellent. You seem to have a decent grasp on the subject, far better than most anti gun liberals. Great.

Now lets proceed. What round does more damage to a human, a 223 or a .45acp hollow point....or even a 9mm HP. Lets also keep in mind that a bullet is even more lethal when lodged.
you are such a subject matter expert.

You are completely missing the point--as usual.

Last edited by badfast; 01-11-2013 at 12:37 PM.
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 12:52 PM   #53
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 914
My Ride: 2003 FormulaRedS2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdsesq View Post
As the saying goes: Guns don't kill people, bullets do.

We could let people own all the guns they want, and outlaw the owning of bullets. After all, the 2nd Am is the right to keep and bear arms, not the right to keep and bear projectiles.

The fact of the matter remains, it has been ruled by the SCOTUS that restrictions on the possession of certain guns is constitutionally acceptable. As I recall, the AW ban put in place under the Clinton admin was upheld as constitutional as well. So there is constitutional precedent for such a ban.

So to those that say any type of AW ban is a violation of the 2nd amendment, I would suggest you look back at when this constitutional question has been raised before. The results may surprise you. But, that may be to much work, rather than a knee jerk reaction not based on reality.

And for those, like that "CEO", it is a pity that if an AW ban is imposed under previous constraints ruled as constitutional by SCOTUS, they would gladly violate the constitution and the constitutional rights of all citizens. After all, actions in violation of the constitutional powers of the judicial branch, Article III of the constitution, violates the constitutional rights of all citizens. But, they seem ignorant of that portion of the constitution. It appears for these people, ignorance is bliss, and that is truly pitiable.
So you would rather have people make their own ammo at home out of rusty nails and glass then?

The point is simple. A 9mm or a 45 is more lethal than a 223. A 223 is a smaller round, and it is a sharper round with more penetrating power. It will go through a person where a 9mm or a 45 will get lodged, causing infection, sepsis, and a heap of other lethal issues. If anyone knew what they were talking about (legislators and politicians) they would understand that an AR is LESS lethal than a handgun. A AR is also harder to use on the move. A telescoping stock and a pistol grip does nothing for a weapon's lethality, and neither does a barrel shroud. An AR is far harder to conceal. An AR is more awkward to use to someone that is not trained. Anyone who knows anything about guns would know this...but the people who pass laws regulating weapons are completely clueless. Oh, and lets not forget that it is mechanically the same to any hunting rifle. If you cannot admit that this ban is nothing more than a political big d!ck contest that will sound all good and tough on paper but accomplish nothing, you need a reality check. Furthermore, thanks to the loom of this ban, more ARs have been sold in a few months than would normally sell in almost 5 years....so MORE ARs are now on the street. I wasn't even planning on getting one, but I just bought 4.
__________________

Last edited by NFRs2000nyc; 01-11-2013 at 12:58 PM.
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 12:52 PM   #54
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 914
My Ride: 2003 FormulaRedS2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by badfast View Post
you are such a subject matter expert.

You are completely missing the point--as usual.
Go sit at the kiddie table troll, adults are talking.
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 12:59 PM   #55
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 581
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc View Post
Go sit at the kiddie table troll, adults are talking.
You hardly qualify as an adult, must less a coherent individual.
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 01:08 PM   #56
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 914
My Ride: 2003 FormulaRedS2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by badfast View Post
You hardly qualify as an adult, must less a coherent individual.
No need to rustle. Simmer down. We get it, you don't like me. Carry on.
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 01:19 PM   #57
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc View Post
So you would rather have people make their own ammo at home out of rusty nails and glass then?
Facetiousness is lost on you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc View Post
The point is simple. A 9mm or a 45 is more lethal than a 223. A 223 is a smaller round, and it is a sharper round with more penetrating power. It will go through a person where a 9mm or a 45 will get lodged, causing infection, sepsis, and a heap of other lethal issues. If anyone knew what they were talking about (legislators and politicians) they would understand that an AR is LESS lethal than a handgun. A AR is also harder to use on the move. A telescoping stock and a pistol grip does nothing for a weapon's lethality, and neither does a barrel shroud. An AR is far harder to conceal. An AR is more awkward to use to someone that is not trained. Anyone who knows anything about guns would know this...but the people who pass laws regulating weapons are completely clueless. Oh, and lets not forget that it is mechanically the same to any hunting rifle. If you cannot admit that this ban is nothing more than a political big d!ck contest that will sound all good and tough on paper but accomplish nothing, you need a reality check. Furthermore, thanks to the loom of this ban, more ARs have been sold in a few months than would normally sell in almost 5 years....so MORE ARs are now on the street. I wasn't even planning on getting one, but I just bought 4.
The point is, "good law" or "bad law", there are bans on AW that are constitutional (at least under current rulings).
You may not like it or agree with it, but, it is the constitutional reality. One must understand and embrace this. The USSC has made ruling I don;t like or agree with. I still don't think corporations are "citizens", but, it is the constitutional reality. One acknowledges this and moves on.

You want to talk about potential. Then lets talk about potential. One of the issues with certain AW is their capability to be converted from semi-auto to full-auto. You want to talk about potential damage. A full-auto AW can spit out enough rounds to cut a person in two. That is a far more lethal capability than any handgun. And before all the chiming in about "oh those conversions hardly ever happen." Well, perhaps my perspective is different, since I knew a guy who got popped for doing such conversions in 1985. Did at least 12 years, hard time. Any machinist worth his/her salt can make the parts required for the conversion. And once they have made the part once, making dozens is much easier and quicker. So if you wish to speak about potential harm, you need to consider all potentials contained within the weapons, not just bullets.
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 01:33 PM   #58
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 581
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc View Post
No need to rustle. Simmer down. We get it, you don't like me. Carry on.
First, you are right. I don't like you (at least the way you present yourself online).

But, allow me to provide a quick explanation on the other side. Not understanding the other side makes these arguments pointless. The anti-gun group has the advantage to argue from emotion of sympathy. Whereas gun owners as also arguing from emotion, but it comes off as more angry.

Let me explain to you the argument in pictures:

This a .40 next to a 7.62x39. You can see the difference. There is also velocity differences, etc. etc. Granted no one would want to be hit by either.

Now you see the difference in magazine capacity. The Kahr magazine holds only 6 rounds. The AK magazine holds 30. 3 Kahr magazines (1 in the gun, 2 backups). That is a total of 18 rounds (19 if I keep one in the chamber, but I don't). It would take 5 Kahr magazines for the same capacity of 1 AK magazine.

Now you can see 6 AK magazines next to each other totaling 180 rounds. For the Kahr to carry that amount would require 30 magazines.


Here are the 2 guns that I used. Now at a close range they are both equally effective, but at increasing distances the handgun starts to lose out. Are you the handgun is just as effective as the rifle at a range of 30m? 100m?

Once you begin to understand that you will really begin to understand the other side. The reality is it is all emotional. Either one of those guns and bullets give the capacity to kill. This isn't a statistics based issue at the moment because as you can see there are stats to support both sides.

Learn to understand the other side first, then you can better support your own side.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	18 vs 180.jpg
Views:	99
Size:	80.9 KB
ID:	485625   Click image for larger version

Name:	40 vs 762.jpg
Views:	77
Size:	58.3 KB
ID:	485626   Click image for larger version

Name:	ak vs kahr.jpg
Views:	76
Size:	76.0 KB
ID:	485627   Click image for larger version

Name:	kahr vs ak.jpg
Views:	79
Size:	56.4 KB
ID:	485628  

badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 01:35 PM   #59
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 581
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc View Post
So you would rather have people make their own ammo at home out of rusty nails and glass then?

The point is simple. A 9mm or a 45 is more lethal than a 223. A 223 is a smaller round, and it is a sharper round with more penetrating power. It will go through a person where a 9mm or a 45 will get lodged, causing infection, sepsis, and a heap of other lethal issues. If anyone knew what they were talking about (legislators and politicians) they would understand that an AR is LESS lethal than a handgun. A AR is also harder to use on the move. A telescoping stock and a pistol grip does nothing for a weapon's lethality, and neither does a barrel shroud. An AR is far harder to conceal. An AR is more awkward to use to someone that is not trained. Anyone who knows anything about guns would know this...but the people who pass laws regulating weapons are completely clueless. Oh, and lets not forget that it is mechanically the same to any hunting rifle. If you cannot admit that this ban is nothing more than a political big d!ck contest that will sound all good and tough on paper but accomplish nothing, you need a reality check. Furthermore, thanks to the loom of this ban, more ARs have been sold in a few months than would normally sell in almost 5 years....so MORE ARs are now on the street. I wasn't even planning on getting one, but I just bought 4.
If handguns are more lethal why are not the chosen weapon in war? Why do they serve as a backup?
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 01:38 PM   #60
peytonracer4
:D
 
peytonracer4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Valparaiso, IN
Posts: 6,689
My Ride: '00 328i
Quote:
Originally Posted by badfast View Post
If handguns are more lethal why are not the chosen weapon in war? Why do they serve as a backup?
Because you can't bust in a door, hit someone 2 feet in front of you, hit someone 300 yards away and put a 60 round magazine in a pistol. Also the guns they use are fully automatic which are MUCH more lethal than the semi auto ar15 we can guy here. They're not even the same gun.
However if you're in the mall and you're trying to murder like 5 people because you just went crazy, they're essentially the same lethality. Pistol might even be better because they're easily concealed.
Try again.
__________________
choose to click or forever hold your peace ;)

Last edited by peytonracer4; 01-11-2013 at 01:40 PM.
peytonracer4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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
Censor is ON





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
(c) 1999 - 2011 performanceIX Inc - privacy policy - terms of use