Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Missouri democrats to confiscate firearms


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#31    OverSword

OverSword

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,154 posts
  • Joined:16 Oct 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle WA USA

  • I love chocolate

Posted 15 February 2013 - 10:44 PM

View Postninjadude, on 15 February 2013 - 04:14 AM, said:

seems like a sensible law. I hope it passes.
What is sensible about requiring people to destroy or turn in property that was perfectly legal when they paid good money for it????  With some of the things you post it's almost like you don't have your own opinion about anything, just toe that party line again and again.


#32    OverSword

OverSword

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,154 posts
  • Joined:16 Oct 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle WA USA

  • I love chocolate

Posted 15 February 2013 - 10:47 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 15 February 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

Unless the laws have changed since the 70s, yes. It is not like anybody without training gets to own anything but a shotgun though.
Alot of damage can be done to a room full of people if one of them has a shotgun.


#33    OverSword

OverSword

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,154 posts
  • Joined:16 Oct 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle WA USA

  • I love chocolate

Posted 15 February 2013 - 10:50 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 15 February 2013 - 09:45 PM, said:

Alot of hype for a proposed bill that has no possibility of being passed in Missouri.
That's what they said about obamacare


#34    MichaelW

MichaelW

    Poltergeist

  • Banned
  • 2,523 posts
  • Joined:14 Nov 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nelson, New Zealand

  • Doctors are sadists who like to play God and watch lesser people scream.

Posted 16 February 2013 - 09:48 AM

View PostOverSword, on 15 February 2013 - 10:44 PM, said:

What is sensible about requiring people to destroy or turn in property that was perfectly legal when they paid good money for it????  With some of the things you post it's almost like you don't have your own opinion about anything, just toe that party line again and again.

Laws change.

Signature removed - please see rule 3b.

#35    Uncle Sam

Uncle Sam

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,600 posts
  • Joined:26 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

Posted 16 February 2013 - 11:12 AM

View PostMichaelW, on 16 February 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

Laws change.

True, but this change is unconstitutional.

A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. - Albert Einstein

#36    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 16 February 2013 - 01:07 PM

View Postaztek, on 14 February 2013 - 08:53 PM, said:

out of all the states, i'm surprised it is  missouri. even new york didn't say nothing about actually remoiving, yet, only regester, but i guess they will soon as well.

that is how it starts, than they will remove the rest, little by little no one will notice.
'

You have to remember that there is Missouri and then there is St. Louis.

Any idiot in the legislature can propose a bill.  This has zero chance of passing.

Although ti does blow a hole in the myth that this whole thing isn't about gun confiscation.

Not to mention, if it did pass, it would make zero difference in the shooting rate since only about 200 people are killed by "assault weapons" annually.

Edited by Rafterman, 16 February 2013 - 01:12 PM.

"For me, it is better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
                                                                                                                                           - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World:  Science as a Candle in the Dark

#37    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,771 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 16 February 2013 - 10:04 PM

If the state of Missouri passed such a law I'd never travel there or ever do business with anyone from there again.  If Alabama passed such a law, the day an officer came to take possession of my weapons I think        I would become infamous for a few seconds on the media.  Both he and myself would relearn what the second amendment was truly about - more's the pity.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#38    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,279 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 17 February 2013 - 12:39 AM

View PostOverSword, on 15 February 2013 - 10:44 PM, said:

What is sensible about requiring people to destroy or turn in property that was perfectly legal when they paid good money for it??

You can pay "good money" for any number of illegal items that would be confiscated by government. Illegal arms are no different.

and no, I'm not "toeing" any party line, I'm in total agreement with it.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#39    Bavarian Raven

Bavarian Raven

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,905 posts
  • Joined:14 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia

Posted 17 February 2013 - 01:30 AM

Quote

What is sensible about requiring people to destroy or turn in property that was perfectly legal when they paid good money for it??





Quote

You can pay "good money" for any number of illegal items that would be confiscated by government. Illegal arms are no different.

Well they werent illegal at the time. So if this happens, the gov. should compensate the people for cost of the firearms plus interest since time of purchase. ;)


#40    lancimouspitt

lancimouspitt

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Joined:22 Oct 2011

Posted 17 February 2013 - 01:38 AM

View Postand then, on 16 February 2013 - 10:04 PM, said:

If the state of Missouri passed such a law I'd never travel there or ever do business with anyone from there again.  If Alabama passed such a law, the day an officer came to take possession of my weapons I think I would become infamous for a few seconds on the media.  Both he and myself would relearn what the second amendment was truly about - more's the pity.

I feel the same. Though i'm wondering how many officers would actually want to even go through with this.


#41    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,771 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 17 February 2013 - 02:12 AM

View Postlancimouspitt, on 17 February 2013 - 01:38 AM, said:

I feel the same. Though i'm wondering how many officers would actually want to even go through with this.
It would be a great tragedy and would pit honest, otherwise law abiding citizens against their own friends and neighbors who work in local government.  But a line MUST be drawn somewhere and this is the place.  If they win this battle then none of the others can be one by the free people of this country.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#42    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,279 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 17 February 2013 - 02:32 AM

View PostBavarian Raven, on 17 February 2013 - 01:30 AM, said:

Well they werent illegal at the time. So if this happens, the gov. should compensate the people for cost of the firearms plus interest since time of purchase. ;)

you'd think so but consider the drug laws where the government can confiscate nearly anything "associated" with drugs during a drug enforcement action. Cars, boats, houses, etc. No one is compensated. Consider the cash confiscated from people traveling across country on the "suspicion" that it must be for drugs. No one is compensated.

http://www.fee.org/t...property-rights
http://jalopnik.com/...biding-citizens

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#43    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Ntwadumela- He who greets with fire

  • Member
  • 12,665 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in the depths of my mind

Posted 17 February 2013 - 05:56 PM

View PostPurifier, on 15 February 2013 - 06:34 AM, said:

So this new law, if it get's past in Missouri, means only ten people can be killed at a time, because of a 10 round limitation? Why 10 and not way lower than that? What about those who do decide to go on a killing ramapage and carry three or more guns (especially hand guns)? It's likely they got two hands. Or if they start duct taping 10 round clips together, or gluing two pistol clips end to end, which any trick like that could equal 20 to 30 rounds alltogether, how does that stop the 10 round kill ratio?


I don't get it. How does this stop mass killings when lots of people know tricks like that to get around the law they're trying to pass?

It doesnt. This has nothing to do with stopping anything other then the idea that you are free.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#44    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Ntwadumela- He who greets with fire

  • Member
  • 12,665 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in the depths of my mind

Posted 17 February 2013 - 06:03 PM

View Postninjadude, on 17 February 2013 - 12:39 AM, said:

You can pay "good money" for any number of illegal items that would be confiscated by government. Illegal arms are no different.

and no, I'm not "toeing" any party line, I'm in total agreement with it.

What are you talking about? These people didnt buy illegal arms. They played by the rules. And now they want to change the rules. You act as if these people paid good money to buy something they knew the government was going to confiscate. Im just gonna call you CNN from now on. Cause Im pretty sure you have never said a single thing on here that wasnt a regurgitation of it.

The worst part is, come the next republican president, you will be condeming him for the exact things you defend 0bama for.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#45    pallidin

pallidin

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,099 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:46 PM

Since the intention of the 2nd Amendment is to equalize the firepower of citizen-vs-government in order to help prevent the government from becoming an autonomous entity with the potential of forcefully creating a "military state", I demand my right to possess any and all weapons the Gov does. Including nuclear weapons.

Wouldn't go very far would it.  :passifier:





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users