Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Other > Motorcycle.Com Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-09-2008, 06:29 AM   #71
Kenneth_Moore
Registered Member
 
Kenneth_Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowningBAR View Post
This message is brought to you by someone that is smart enough not to vote for either party.
The smartest thing I ever heard you say. As for Palin, if she goes to the convention and "But Fenumiai adds that Palin's husband Todd was a member of the AIP from October 1995 through July 2002" that's good enough for me. I'd deny it too if I were her, and I'd be busy calling everyone I knew to ask them to deny it as well.

Even if she weren't a member, she's still a buffoon. Everytime I hear her speak, I think she's well qualified to lead the hockey team fund-raiser, and not much else.
__________________
www.kennethmoore.org
Kenneth_Moore is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 09-09-2008, 06:34 AM   #72
BrowningBAR
Snuggles

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: In a really, really, really old farmhouse
Posts: 4,369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenneth_Moore View Post
An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle or carbine (not to be confused with a semi-automatic only replica) firing ammunition with muzzle energies intermediate between those typical of pistol and high-powered rifle ammunition. Assault rifles are the standard small arms in most modern armies, having largely replaced or supplemented larger, more powerful battle rifles, such as the World War II-era M1 Garand and SVT-40. Examples of assault rifles include the AK-47, the M16 rifle, the FAMAS and the Steyr AUG. Semi-automatic rifles, including commercial versions of the AR-15, and "automatic" rifles limited to single fire only, even though incorrectly classified in the United States as assault rifles by the now defunct 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, are not assault rifles as they are not selective fire. Belt-fed weapons or rifles with fixed magazines are also generally not considered assault rifles.

Pulling a KPaul on us with google search intelligence, Kenneth? Ok, you posted it so now tell me how many crimes were committed with assault rifles in a given year. Again, the example of an assault rifle is an AK-47, the M16 rifle, the FAMAS and the Steyr AUG. Which are ALL CLASS III weapons that require in-depth government background check (far more than a standard firearm) plus a license transfer of $200-$500.
BrowningBAR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 06:45 AM   #73
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

You defined it incorrectly even though your Googled answer was prompt. What you are starting to experience is that huge void between knowing what you are talking about thinking you do. You know nothing about guns, gun laws, or supposed assault rifles Ken. All you know is the liberal drivel you have been reading. This is almost as much fun as arguing with old KP about motorcycles. So now you want to know why BAR NEEDS an AK? It's because the Constitution says he can have one. Since you are an 'individual right' guy, why would it bother you if I had an AK? Do I need one? I might. Unlike you, I have actually been in situations where I needed a gun. Do you need a motorcycle? Certainly not. Then we should ban those. Are we basing everything we can have on a 'need' basis now? I can think of lots more things you don't 'need'. Only cops and the military need guns, righ tKen?
__________________
I'm a knucklehead

Last edited by longride : 09-09-2008 at 06:49 AM.
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 06:48 AM   #74
Kenneth_Moore
Registered Member
 
Kenneth_Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowningBAR View Post
Pulling a KPaul on us with google search intelligence, Kenneth? Ok, you posted it so now tell me how many crimes were committed with assault rifles in a given year. Again, the example of an assault rifle is an AK-47, the M16 rifle, the FAMAS and the Steyr AUG. Which are ALL CLASS III weapons that require in-depth government background check (far more than a standard firearm) plus a license transfer of $200-$500.
The quote was from Wikipedia, which only goes to show how pointless demanding a definition of assault rifles is; it avoids the real point which is that having easily available assault rifes in an urban setting isn't good for anyone. If you think it's a good idea for everyone to have one, good for you. I don't. Same goes for looking up how many crimes they're used in; it is completely irrelevant.

I'd still like to hear why you think we should have automatic weapons and/or assault rifles easily available. There is one reason I can think of, but let's see if you suggest the same one.
__________________
www.kennethmoore.org
Kenneth_Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 06:53 AM   #75
Kenneth_Moore
Registered Member
 
Kenneth_Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by longride View Post
Do you need a motorcycle? Certainly not. Then we should ban those. Are we basing everything we can have on a 'need' basis now?
So you're saying having a motorcycle is the same as having an assault rifle? Good argument, makes sense.
__________________
www.kennethmoore.org
Kenneth_Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 07:03 AM   #76
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

Pretty much. You talked about why I NEED to have an assault rifle. Why do you NEED a motorcycle? You based your argument on NEED, didn't you? You did that because you don't have a real argument as to why I shouldn't have one either morally or Constitutionally. So if we base things on need, then you certainly don't need a motorcycle. If you can take away a Constitutional amendment based on need, I can certainly take away your motorcycle. So 'individual rights' that you were so high on a few posts ago don't extend to gun owners? More typical liberal duplicity.
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 07:12 AM   #77
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowningBAR View Post
I agree, but unfortunately the Repubs have their religious fanatics...and quite frankly, I like abortion. Anything that helps idiot to not reproduce is a super fine idea in my book. And you should not choose one religion to base your laws on a population that worships many different (or no) gods. Also, if you know ahead of time that the fetus may have severe health problem, I think the parents should be aloud to make the decision themselves and not Suzy Zealot.

Again, everyone needs to joined with me and stop voting for the two main parties.

At the very least, vote Zod/Non in '08.
Religious zealot = anyone who opposes leftists.

And be sure to vote Zod/Non. Then we won't need abortion.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 07:12 AM   #78
Kenneth_Moore
Registered Member
 
Kenneth_Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by longride View Post
Pretty much. You talked about why I NEED to have an assault rifle. Why do you NEED a motorcycle? You based your argument on NEED, didn't you? You did that because you don't have a real argument as to why I shouldn't have one either morally or Constitutionally. So if we base things on need, then you certainly don't need a motorcycle. If you can take away a Constitutional amendment based on need, I can certainly take away your motorcycle. So 'individual rights' that you were so high on a few posts ago don't extend to gun owners? More typical liberal duplicity.
If you can't see the difference between owning an assault rifle versus a motorcycle, then we have no common ground to work with. Life isn't that simple, and being able to differentiate between a motorcycle and an assault rifle is vital to a meaningful discussion. As for individual rights, we're all required to make concessions on them if we choose to live in a larger society. You have a right to expect your neighbor not to open a toxic waste dump next to your house, even though that infringes on his individual rights. Likewise, I think that people should have a right to own and use guns appropriately, but I don't think WalMart should sell AK-47s to anyone with the money to buy one.
__________________
www.kennethmoore.org
Kenneth_Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 07:25 AM   #79
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

"As for individual rights, we're all required to make concessions on them if we choose to live in a larger society."

Yeah, and you and Obama are going to tell us all exactly what concessions we all have to make. Sounds like a really good reason to get an AK to me. So you don't think Wal-Mart should sell AK's? How about if they have abortion clinics there at Wal-Mart? OK with you, right? My owning an AK infringes on the rights of nobody, yet killing babies is acceptable. Simply amazing logic there. Life is real simple Ken, abortion ends it. You still haven't addressed the issue of the man wants his baby that just got aborted. No rights for him? I guess that is one of the 'concessions' we had to make to live in a larger society? Maybe he doesn't 'need' that son or daughter? Go ahead. Give me some more of that liberal double speak that washes the blood all clean in your mind. Ever see pictures of those late term abortions Ken? I'll post some up if you like.
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 07:29 AM   #80
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenneth_Moore View Post
If you can't see the difference between owning an assault rifle versus a motorcycle, then we have no common ground to work with. Life isn't that simple, and being able to differentiate between a motorcycle and an assault rifle is vital to a meaningful discussion. As for individual rights, we're all required to make concessions on them if we choose to live in a larger society. You have a right to expect your neighbor not to open a toxic waste dump next to your house, even though that infringes on his individual rights. Likewise, I think that people should have a right to own and use guns appropriately, but I don't think WalMart should sell AK-47s to anyone with the money to buy one.
LOL! As if any of these laws ever stopped criminals from obtaining them. The reliance that both Rats and Pubes have on worthless laws is itself a form of religious observance. "Oooh. I see something I don't like. We better pass another law. We don't care how much misery we cause the decent people. But we FEEL better by having another worthless law that we can threaten everyone with. Never mind that people in cities that have gun control have to cower in their homes at night."

I do have to give Obamalama credit for one thing though. When he speaks without a teleprompter he makes Bush sound articulate! ROTFLMAO.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off