Gun Control in the Socialist Republic of Kahlifornia

[Bender711]

That reminds me, that whole 9/11 thing could have been prevented if people were allowed to carry guns on airplanes.

 

[Mikhail Kalashnikov]

lol, but wouldnt the terrorists have access to guns then too? apparently the hijackers didn't have guns in 9/11, they used knives and boxcutters. We might need a new amendment so that we can have the right to bear boxcutters!

 

[[CiA]Stiletto]

Sneaking a gun onto an airplane is trivially easy, even with the TSA.

 

[Bender711]

lol, but wouldnt the terrorists have access to guns then too? apparently the hijackers didn't have guns in 9/11, they used knives and boxcutters. We might need a new amendment so that we can have the right to bear boxcutters!

yes they would have had guns but they would have been dead long before they were able to take control of the plane.

 

[Oberst Freitag]

would you rather have it and not need it or need it and not have it?

when are you going to need an automatic rifle? WHne the chinamen invade? Thast the only thing i can think off...Self Defense is a joke...a shotgun is a much more useful self-defense tool.

I live in NY which is also has some strict gun laws but luckily im in upstate nY which isnt too bad...i have some shotguns and rifles that i use for hunting and thats it. I dont sport shoot...the only time im not shooting for hunting is when im sighting them in before deer season.

But i support gun laws to an extent...to me the Assault Weapons ban is a joke because of what htey classify as an AR...it menas practically nothing...i would hope they eventually fix it and make it more realistic. As much as some of you are pro-gun...there is need for some of these laws....yes for the most part people who buy these guns are going to be safe with them and wont commit armed robberies...but chances are they can be stolen from the owners and used in said crimes...and that leaves the local pd at a disadvantage.

Just look at the Norht Hollywood shootout...the california legislature has every right to enact those laws after that incident...

 

[Oberst Freitag]

That reminds me, that whole 9/11 thing could have been prevented if people were allowed to carry guns on airplanes.

wow...you really didnt think that through did you?

 

[Bender711]

wow...you really didnt think that through did you?

hows that?

 

[The Soup Nazi]

See, thats complete logic there. Because the criminals in the North Hollywood shoot out, lets take away the guns from law abiding citizens, the criminals are still going to get AK-47s with 75 round drums no matter what law you place. And the solution isn't to take away the guns. How about giving the police an MP5 or an AR-15 in their cars. I'm not going to break the law, its not going to be a problem for me.

 

[Bender711]

O yea what would have hapened if every body had an ar15 in that north holly wood shoot out? If i had been there With my m4 I would have gone out found some cover and shot at the BG's.

 

[[CoFR]BooBoo]

The events in North Hollywood are a classic example of woefully undertrained, underequipped and underprepaired law enforcement personnel in action. If any of those officers had been truly competent both the criminals would have been dead before they could have left the bank parking lot. They were trying to shoot criminals who were openly wearing bullet-proof vests (on their torsos, arms and legs) with buckshot and hollowpoints. Not one single unit that responded had a rifle. Not one.

Even so, someone who knew what they were doing with a pistol could have killed both bank robbers with no trouble at all. But alas, not one single officer tried for a headshot, they were all shooting center of mass on targets that were shrugging off every hit that landed. And with all the rounds fired by the police, that was a pitifully small amount of hits.

BTW, training hasn't improved significantly since then.

 

[Musketeer]

North Hollywood was committed by criminals who ILLEGALY had fully automatic weapons. For those who are not aware such weapons are almost impossible to get legally in the USA, most certainly so in California. To get one you need to go through some of the most exhaustive background checks a civilian will ever see and submit to numerous invasions of your privacy by the jack booted thugs of the BATF.

Shotguns are NOT suitable for all forms of defense. Shotgun slugs are NOT going to penetrate body armor. Last year there were two very public killings, Red Branch Minnesotta and Tyler Texas, where the bad guy was wearing body armor. In Noth Hollywood the officers actually went to a local gunstore to get more effective weaponry, even that though was not fully automatic, like the criminals had.

If the bad guys are going to be wearing armor then the good guys, meaning ALL lawful citizens, need a way to defeat it. I am probably going to pick up a surplus SKS in 7.62x39 to use as a trunk gun. Cheap, reliable, accurate enough for the job over iron sights, will penetrate most body armor, and ammo is available by the ton.

 

[The Soup Nazi]

Good luck, get all the ammo that you can, buy in bulk, with all the imports to the Iraqi Police/army (Who probably do need it more than we do), its getting harder to find, plus the prices are never going to go down thanks to the tax on importing ammo. (And by the way, 7.62X39mm wouldn't cost so much if whoever was in charge of the US Military didn't decide to destroy all the weapons found when we have to contract Wolf to divert ammunition to them anyways)

 

[Musketeer]

Even so, someone who knew what they were doing with a pistol could have killed both bank robbers with no trouble at all. But alas, not one single officer tried for a headshot, they were all shooting center of mass on targets that were shrugging off every hit that landed. And with all the rounds fired by the police, that was a pitifully small amount of hits.

BTW, training hasn't improved significantly since then.

Head shots would have been tough with a handgun against a moving target that was hosing your area with automatic gunfire. I agree though that they just kept trying to hit center of mass though and to no effect.

Any of the officers with shotguns though, especially slug guns, should have been able make a head shot. A rifled shotgun slug will hurt but it is not going through body armor.

Two things have happenned in the aftermath of that shooting.

1. More officers are now carrying a .223 rifle in the car in order to counter similar threats.

2. California political insanity drove the gun store out of business that provided the needed rifles to the police during the crisis.

 

[The Soup Nazi]

Its a proven fact that politicians will always take advantage of crisis. 9/11 made the Patriot Act. Pro gun control used Columbine and North Hollywood to their advantage. Hell, look at Star wars Episode 3, we all knew how that turned out.

 

[[CoFR]BooBoo]

North Hollywood was committed by criminals who ILLEGALY had fully automatic weapons.

Actually they didn't have ANY fully automatic weapons. They had commercially available Norinco AK clones with Tri-Burst Activators on the triggers. Basically a geared mechanism that pulls the gun's trigger 3 times for each pull on the activator's trigger. News reporters and politically motivated law enforcement officials kept using phrases like "automatic assault rifles" so much that they muddied the issue beyond recognition.

The shotguns carried by the police had buckshot, not slugs. This is the land of PC police, and carrying slugs isn't PC according to the soft-hearted idiots who control California. Remember, LAPD just recently made it against policy for an officer to shoot at a moving vehicle even if the driver is deliberately trying to run over the officer, UNLESS someone in the vehicle is displaying a firearm. A typical example of how law enforcement here has its hands tied by liberal politicians. And even though SOME (by no means all) officers are authorized to carry AR-15 rifles in their cars, the situations in which they are actually allowed to use them are few and far between. Being shot at by a rifle-armed bank robber may not actually be an "authorized" instance.

Yes, the gun store that some police officers entered and "borrowed" rifles from was closed down - for failure to properly fill out federally mandated paperwork before allowing those officers to leave the premises with the weapons. The rifles, AFAIK, are either still in the LAPD evidence locker or were destroyed by LAPD. Once they get their hands on someone's gun, they do their damndest to never, ever give it back.

 

[Oberst Freitag]

hows that?

because then the terrorists would have guns...and most of those people still wouldnt have guns with them because few people have a CCW license

see...you didnt think things though

 

[Oberst Freitag]

The events in North Hollywood are a classic example of woefully undertrained, underequipped and underprepaired law enforcement personnel in action. If any of those officers had been truly competent both the criminals would have been dead before they could have left the bank parking lot. They were trying to shoot criminals who were openly wearing bullet-proof vests (on their torsos, arms and legs) with buckshot and hollowpoints. Not one single unit that responded had a rifle. Not one.

Even so, someone who knew what they were doing with a pistol could have killed both bank robbers with no trouble at all. But alas, not one single officer tried for a headshot, they were all shooting center of mass on targets that were shrugging off every hit that landed. And with all the rounds fired by the police, that was a pitifully small amount of hits.

BTW, training hasn't improved significantly since then.

as much respect as i have for cops and and several of my friends are troopers...even they admit that police arent the worst shots...but are far from effective shots...few shoot there guns in anger and the training they go for is inadequete for the adrenaline that will be pumping through your body...just watch Wildest Police chase shows and when ever cops open fire they usually shoot repeatedly and dont hit much

 

[Bender711]

because then the terrorists would have guns...and most of those people still wouldnt have guns with them because few people have a CCW license

see...you didnt think things though

so one or two good guy having a gun is worse than completly unarmed people aginst people with weapons?

And how would the terrorist have CCW's see you didnt thing it through.

 

[Oberst Freitag]

so one or two good guy having a gun is worse than completly unarmed people aginst people with weapons?

And how would the terrorist have CCW's see you didnt thing it through.

yes...but you're still not thinking it through...these people would have their guns out first and wouldnt hesitate to shoot...the civilains would probably hesitate shooting someone

 

[Bender711]

ok how would the terrorists get a CCW, they are not Americans (and alot of them lived in Kalifornia. And how do they know who to shoot? I doubt that they brought enough ammo on their person to kill every one on the plane. Or even if they had enough ammo they wouldnt be able to get their shots off fast enough before some good guy with a gun got to them.

And whyt would some one hesitate to shoot a guy thats shooting up their plane?