Comments on: Found it on Facebook: It’s impossible to educate Progressives about guns

By: Mike Devx

Mike Devx — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:53:14 +0000

Texan99, you said (#11) The point of this freedom is to equalize any potential battle between myself and my government.

Well, it certainly is better than being disarmed, though I don’t know that “equalize” would be the word I’d choose. Government firepower will be massive. But fifty million armed citizens, even if most have basic rifle or handgun, would be nothing to sneeze at.

And the superiorly-armed police and military would not be a monolith. Yes, they will have sworn to uphold their government without qualification. But how many would suffer a crisis of conscience as they recognize that the government is the enemy? As many as half? What happens when a huge portion of your armed force flips over to join with the insurgency?

Brings to mind the Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times. There’s a good chance such times are coming, but when? Twenty years? Ten? Fifty? I’m not sure it will happen in my lifetime?

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 17:52:37 +0000

The original point was that it is impossible to be able to determine what a family needs to protect themselves with. Thus it is up to the government to make the case that something should be banned because it exceeds the ability of a single man to carry in his arms.

New Orleans has already confiscated guns, yet I don’t see Katrina on the news. Lack of control of a nation’s propaganda arms will lead to that nation’s destruction by those that do have control.

By: Texan99

Texan99 — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:51:37 +0000

My right to bear arms is not limited to arms that are needed either for hunting or for the defense of my home against burglars. The point of this freedom is to equalize any potential battle between myself and my government.

By: 11B40

11B40 — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 01:14:15 +0000

Greetings: especially “beefrank” @ #4

Apparently, my assertion about most police officers having possession or quick access to automatic assault weapons was another of my triumphs of imagination over intellect. Following your comment I did a ‘bing’ search and was unable to find anything even closely related to what I related.

My apologies to you and any others I misinformed.

By: beefrank

beefrank — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 21:50:42 +0000

Educate the Left on guns? I would rather show them. Note these Glock commercials with the phrase 'Picked the Wrong...' with Lee 'Gunny' Ermey as the Glock guy and introducing the new Glock girl.

By: Mike Devx

Mike Devx — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 21:27:48 +0000

Hi JKB, and yep, 3-D printed magazines are a reality, and robust enough. There aren’t many parts, and the forces involved on the magazine aren’t large. So you can 3-D print your own 20-clip magazine for your favorite gun, no matter how much they restrict sales. Who cares if it wears out quickly? Just print another.

3-D printing a *gun*, however, is still beyond us… TODAY, at least. But how long before we can 3-D print a gun that can last for 100 rounds? Picture an insurgency where in one house’s dark basement, you have twenty computers and 3-D printers cranking out AR-15 gun parts 24-7. Two people on shift constantly assembling the parts into functional guns. What good is a gun that is unusable after 100 rounds, you say? Picture a small assault team on a mission. Each has two such guns. They complete the mission and retreat; along the way they toss all their guns in a weed-strewn lot without even a moment’s thought, as though each gun were a chewed piece of bubblegum, and disappear. So what if they toss every gun after the mission? The guns are completely and easily replaceable. Each day in that basement they’ve generated a hundred more.
The programs already exist for creating such guns, and for assembling them. The problem is that they don’t work because the materials are deficient compared to the forces involved in firing projectile bullets. They don’t work… Yet.
What will come.

By: JKB

JKB — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:03:09 +0000

I’ve already seen a printed, functional, high-cap magazine. Report I read was they’ve printed a handgun and it fired at least 3 rounds before failure.

The most surprising thing I read, and I don’t have the link, is they are printing organs and tissue. A group just formed to try to move that away from the very expensive equipment. You know, for when you need a new liver after a wild Saturday night or something. Print one up on Sunday and you’re back at work on Monday.

BTW, it is my understanding some police departments have issued or permit the carry of semi-automatic AR-15 in the trunks of patrol cars. Fully auto and burst fire weapons are still very expensive and very heavily controlled. Loss of such firearms is a very big deal. A family member, who as a state bureau of investigation agent, had a full auto M4 in his car, had to investigate a theft from another agent’s car. It was laborious.

By: Mike Devx

Mike Devx — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 18:54:23 +0000

This article on the technology of “3-D Printing” was fascinating to me.

I’ve been hearing and reading small things about “3-D Printing” for about a year, and I’ve considered it ridiculous. With some justification: The technology is very new and not very trustworthy yet.

But that’s the key word: YET. This is an area of technology in which things are going to move with astonishing swiftness.

Check out the relatively short article below; I think you’ll be glad you did. I’m commenting on this here because it is about the current state of the 3-D Printing technology for creating guns and magazine clips via the computer and “specialized” 3-D Printing peripherals. It’s a brave new world; where will we be five years from now?

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/25/will_computers_kill_gun_control/

By: lee

lee — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 18:00:14 +0000

I tell ya, in the zombie video games, the burst-modes are the weapons to have. They take out almost all the zombies. Plus, it has the added bonus of making sure Rule 2 of Zombieland is ALWAYS followed, by default.

Seriously though…

I think that the background check for even private purchases is the slippery slope to a gun registration. I can see what ever bureaucratic agency running the database will, without any realy authority or oversight, add the question of specifically what weapons are involved in the sale that is prompting the inquiry. After several years, all the guns are in this database, and presto! De facto gun registry.

These people have me nervous. Very nervous. Where did I recently read that in 1928, the Nazi party only had 3,000 members? It doesn’t take much, but it takes cunning and deceit, as well as a lazy population willing to let their thinking be done for them.

By: beefrank

beefrank — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:47:03 +0000

I question the fact that 'most' American police have (A)auto-fire or even select-fire carbines in their patrol cars. I was told they are mostly the (S)single-fire versions of the M16. The terms 'semi-automatic', 'large capacity magazine', 'assault rifle' and 'military' are distorted by the Left to demonize 2nd Amendment supporters and shame gun owners to facilitate disarming the citizenry. Besides, 'full-auto' or 'machine' guns have been overrated and glamorized by Hollywood which I suppose is also the Left. In New York, the recent state bill unconstitutionally bans firearms with over seven rounds which is about 95% of the existing rifles, shotguns and pistols. I am sure you have seen Cuomo's 'no one needs 10-shots to kill a deer' rant which echos another progressive mantra. It ranks up there with the 'if only one is saved' plead. I talked to a NYC SWAT policeman carrying an MP5 and he said only SWAT units have access to auto-fire carbines and they are the burst-mode types which fire 2 or 3 rounds with single trigger pull. According to Biden, the firearm technology should return to the single-action, six-shot revolver, two-shot derringer and break-action double-barrel shotgun. At least for the law-abiding citizens. Lets also regress to the 386 chip, 9.6kps modems and the BBS. That would be fun.