2aHawaii
General Topics => General Discussion => Topic started by: hir0bir0 on January 17, 2013, 05:21:27 PM
-
Did you guys see this? What an idiot!
http://www.kitv.com/news/hawaii/Hawaii-legislator-advocates-tougher-gun-laws/-/8905354/18178966/-/6i1kihz/-/index.html (http://www.kitv.com/news/hawaii/Hawaii-legislator-advocates-tougher-gun-laws/-/8905354/18178966/-/6i1kihz/-/index.html)
-
Harvey should have said something like: Go ahead and make sure anyone buying BULLETS is licensed. Just don't make it a requirement to buy AMMUNITION. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
The people writing these articles are morons as much as our representatives are.
-
Bought some small rocks today... No permit for my sling shot yet! Gotcha!
-
By the way this current administration is running things, it looks like we'll need a permit to use harsh language. :shake:
-
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=219 (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=219)
It's contagious
-
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=219 (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=219)
It's contagious
It looks like they want to take our pistols too. :wtf:
-
These guys make the Executive Order issue irrelevant don't they? >:(
-
It looks like they want to take our pistols too. :wtf:
Wait, which bill is that? I haven't seen that one, yet. SB219 doesn't substantially change HI's current definition of "Assault Pistol."
-
I did a quick read. This bill appears to ban the possession of "Assault Weapons" with no grandfather clause for existing owners. Total gun grab bill.
-
I wish these jokers would read and understand our current laws before cooking up half baked stuff like this..
It mentions machine guns... Last time I checked, it's been illegal to own one for quite some time.
-
Guys like this prolly got the shit kicked out of them when they were in high school and now they are in politics they want their revenge lol. MF prolly never held a gun in his life!
-
Not to mention we already have tough laws here
-
they should put ulumaika in there too
-
Don't forget to Hit the questionnaire on the lower left of that article page!
Currently we losing out to the retards
-
We are now tied. It looks like another fire mission is needed.
-
I did a quick read. This bill appears to ban the possession of "Assault Weapons" with no grandfather clause for existing owners. Total gun grab bill.
You are absolutely correct. There is NO clause for grandfathering. There is, however, a measure for relinquishment:
"§134-D Relinquishment of assault weapon to law enforcement. Any individual may arrange in advance to relinquish an assault weapon to a county police department or the department of public safety for disposal, without penalty. " :shake:
-
Liberals trying to outstupid each other from different states and doing a mighty fine job IMHO.
Hypothetically speaking, if confiscation becomes reality, who will worry about less than 16" barrels, sound suppressors etc. when what they have is already deemed illegal. I repeat, only hypothetically
and depends on what "IS" is.
-
Don't forget to Hit the questionnaire on the lower left of that article page!
Currently we losing out to the retards
Good idea...we should all hit this so we can use it in subsequent hearings....Hard to say the thousands of Hawaii's gun owners are against this when the poll appears to suggest otherwise.
-
Good idea...we should all hit this so we can use it in subsequent hearings....Hard to say the thousands of Hawaii's gun owners are against this when the poll appears to suggest otherwise.
Thanks for pointing it out. Just voted, the Against votes are leading the For votes by 51%-46%, and we're winning 54%-46% if you count the people who are "For more gun control, but not this particular piece of isht proposal".
-
I wish these jokers would read and understand our current laws before cooking up half baked stuff like this..
It mentions machine guns... Last time I checked, it's been illegal to own one for quite some time.
gotta read the definitions, almost any semi auto AR will be illegal
-
Collapsable stock, pistol grip, flash suppressor on my AR.... I'm doomed! :shake:
-
it's amazing that the antis (and the media) portray a "flash suppressor" as some sort of accessory that makes the gun even more of a killing machine
Collapsable stock, pistol grip, flash suppressor on my AR.... I'm doomed! :shake:
-
it's amazing that the antis (and the media) portray a "flash suppressor" as some sort of accessory that makes the gun even more of a killing machine
they think that you might replace it with a silencer"
-
they think that you might replace it with a silencer"
Even if you did, the firearm would not be "more deadly"
-
Even if you did, the firearm would not be "more deadly"
I agree.... Buts BS are thinking too much about AR.... They even think its was EVIL! LoL
-
it's amazing that the antis (and the media) portray a "flash suppressor" as some sort of accessory that makes the gun even more of a killing machine
Silly.... Everybody knows it's the pistol grip that makes it more deadly :D
-
.
-
The AR should be a symbol of freedom, I think the best argument of why we should have a "miltary" style rifle is why not? If the rifle is good enough for our military and LE why shouldnt we have it to protect ourselves? This argument can go on in favor of gun owners. And what happened to the .223 argument of it being too ineffective? Now the media is saying how powerful the mouse gun is.
-
The AR should be a symbol of freedom, I think the best argument of why we should have a "miltary" style rifle is why not? If the rifle is good enough for our military and LE why shouldnt we have it to protect ourselves? This argument can go on in favor of gun owners. And what happened to the .223 argument of it being too ineffective? Now the media is saying how powerful the mouse gun is.
that wont win over anyone on the fence or on the anti gun side.
im not convinced that "why not" is ever a good argument. at least not in a political debate.
-
that wont win over anyone on the fence or on the anti gun side.
im not convinced that "why not" is ever a good argument. at least not in a political debate.
Title 10 USC 311...
(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1)the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2)the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Why would the "Unorganized Militia" be armed with anything different that what the "Organized Militia" is armed with? If anything, ban the fudd guns, nobody has a right to hunt. The 2nd amendment goes hand in hand with this small sliver of US Code. "to keep and bear" for "the security of a free state" is the sole reasoning for the 2nd amendment, and the very reason why Americans should never be stripped of the same rifle the "Organized Militia" is equipped with. If anything, it should be a federal requirement for all citizens fitting the criteria of "Unorganized Militia" to keep and maintain proficiency with an AR-15 type rifle.
-
stop acting like you're arguing with unbiased people. an argument like "why not" is simply not going to fly.
cmon guys, you cant think like you, you have to think like them. "why not" isnt even really a compelling argument for anything.