Oregon House Bill 3200

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Natebishop3 said:
What is so bad about guns? Seriously, people rage and throw fits about shootings like newtown, but in the grand scheme of things, one school shooting that kills 26 people isn't even a blip on the radar in terms of how many people die every day from cancer, car wrecks, etc. People focus way too much attention on little things and completely ignore the big picture. Our country is going into the shitter and it's damn sure not from guns.

Why not focus on fixing our damn economy, or maybe stop letting politicians sell us out for a sack of cash from corporations like Monsanto?
Click to expand...

It's not that guns are all that bad by themselves, but I find the pro gun lobby by some people to be way over the top to the point of creepy. I have no problem with competent sound people having guns but these paranoid, dismissive, angry, loud, fear mongering individuals do more to hurt their cause then help it.

I do agree with the sentiment of your message though, but just because there are bigger problems doesn't mean we should ignore the smaller ones.
 
It's not that guns are all that bad by themselves
Click to expand...
just because there are bigger problems doesn't mean we should ignore the smaller ones.
Click to expand...
The right to bear arms isn't a "problem", big or small. You said so yourself.

Now, if you want to stop people from owning guns who've committed violent crimes or are under psychiatric care, you have my support. Wait, I think that's already a law, right?

I find it odd that you call the pro-gun lobby "paranoid" (when OldGuy's proven that at least one city's D's voted unanimously to attempt to take them away) and dismissive (when people like Dianne Feinstein and Mayor No-Super-Size attempt to opine on the issue with little to no fact in their rhetoric). You say they're angry and loud, but imho it's probably b/c they haven't been loud enough in the past to get past the idiots who are proposing legislation that makes the country like Chicago (where the "gun laws" haven't really worked). What do you expect? No one's letting Todd Akin rewrite Roe v. Wade, but Feinstein and the like are supposed to be the catalyst for fundamental weapons policy changes that aren't rooted in any manner of reality? Really?
 
Last edited:
BrianFromWA said:
The right to bear arms isn't a "problem", big or small. You said so yourself.

Now, if you want to stop people from owning guns who've committed violent crimes or are under psychiatric care, you have my support. Wait, I think that's already a law, right?

I find it odd that you call the pro-gun lobby "paranoid" (when OldGuy's proven that at least one city's D's voted unanimously to attempt to take them away) and dismissive (when people like Dianne Feinstein and Mayor No-Super-Size attempt to opine on the issue with little to no fact in their rhetoric). You say they're angry and loud, but imho it's probably b/c they haven't been loud enough in the past to get past the idiots who are proposing legislation that makes the country like Chicago (where the "gun laws" haven't really worked). What do you expect? No one's letting Todd Akin rewrite Roe v. Wade, but Feinstein and the like are supposed to be the catalyst for fundamental weapons policy changes that aren't rooted in any manner of reality? Really?
Click to expand...

The problem is Brian, there are people who are afraid of guns. They're afraid to be around them, they're afraid to touch them, etc. People react irrationally when it concerns something they're afraid of. And when it's something that they see as having no practical use other than to kill people, they just want them gone. They see a rare event, like Newtown, and they jump to conclusions. They don't hear about all the thousands of times that firearms have saved lives, or prevented a crime. Doesn't matter to them. They just want them gone, and you also have to remember that you're dealing with a group of people who live completely outside the realm of reality. They actually think that driving their Prius and eating at Whole Foods is saving the planet. They voted for Obama because they actually believed he was different from Bush, or that he would bring change. HA! Suckers.
 
Natebishop3 said:
What is so bad about guns? Seriously, people rage and throw fits about shootings like newtown, but in the grand scheme of things, one school shooting that kills 26 people isn't even a blip on the radar in terms of how many people die every day from cancer, car wrecks, etc. People focus way too much attention on little things and completely ignore the big picture. Our country is going into the shitter and it's damn sure not from guns.

Why not focus on fixing our damn economy, or maybe stop letting politicians sell us out for a sack of cash from corporations like Monsanto?
Click to expand...

There's nothing bad about guns. Nothing at all. I enjoy shooting.

BUT...

There is no reason to justify assault weapons. They are 100% unnecessary, with the single exception for nut jobs to kill substantially more people in a shorter timeframe to get their twisted kicks.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
There's nothing bad about guns. Nothing at all. I enjoy shooting.

BUT...

There is no reason to justify assault weapons. They are 100% unnecessary, with the single exception for nut jobs to kill substantially more people in a shorter timeframe to get their twisted kicks.
Click to expand...

But did you see their definition of "assault weapon"?

It's literally anything that's semi-automatic. That's fucking ridiculous. I get it, most people don't agree with M4/AR-15 variants being owned by the public. The thing is, they constitute such a minuscule portion of crimes committed, and their only real purpose WOULD be to defend ourselves against the government. That's it. That's the only reason to own one, but I personally think it's a very good fucking reason.
 
Oh shit now air soft guns are a gateway to semi automatic guns...
 
9BFbIrY.png
 
Natebishop3 said:
But did you see their definition of "assault weapon"?

It's literally anything that's semi-automatic. That's fucking ridiculous. I get it, most people don't agree with M4/AR-15 variants being owned by the public. The thing is, they constitute such a minuscule portion of crimes committed, and their only real purpose WOULD be to defend ourselves against the government. That's it. That's the only reason to own one, but I personally think it's a very good fucking reason.
Click to expand...

I agree with most everything you've said in the thread Nate, except the bolded part. There is another very real circumstance where having an assault weapon could save you life, and something less might not do.

If there is a MAJOR disaster, like a 9.0+ earthquake and tsunami, there will likely be anarchy for some fairly lengthy period of time before order is restored. Most buildings and many bridges will be on the ground. Many, perhaps most, roads will be impassable. Death and destruction will be the rule of the day. Thousands will die, and tens of thousands will be seriously injured...with no way to get to a hospital. Emergency services will be tied up for weeks/months. Looting will be rampant. Having an assault weapon to defend one's life, family and property could be a huge difference maker when this earthquake strikes, and it WILL strike.

That said, I don't own an assault weapon (unless they had re-defined what that is with HB 3200), and I don't intend to buy one. But I don't see a problem with people that want to be prepared for extreme emergencies. IT IS THEIR RIGHT.

Go Blazers
 
oldguy said:
I agree with most everything you've said in the thread Nate, except the bolded part. There is another very real circumstance where having an assault weapon could save you life, and something less might not do.

If there is a MAJOR disaster, like a 9.0+ earthquake and tsunami, there will likely be anarchy for some fairly lengthy period of time before order is restored. Most buildings and many bridges will be on the ground. Many, perhaps most, roads will be impassable. Death and destruction will be the rule of the day. Thousands will die, and tens of thousands will be seriously injured...with no way to get to a hospital. Emergency services will be tied up for weeks/months. Looting will be rampant. Having an assault weapon to defend one's life, family and property could be a huge difference maker when this earthquake strikes, and it WILL strike.

That said, I don't own an assault weapon (unless they had re-defined what that is with HB 3200), and I don't intend to buy one. But I don't see a problem with people that want to be prepared for extreme emergencies. IT IS THEIR RIGHT.

Go Blazers
Click to expand...

Straight Up! Extreme Natural Disaster, Inflation and Economic Collapse, Solar Flares knocking out the electric grid, all recepies for what you describe. And yes a shotgun is not going to cut it to protect my family.
 
oldmangrouch said:
An awful lot of angst over a Bill that will never even get a hearing.
Click to expand...

That's what Ginny Burdick wants you to think. She has built her career at the government trough by writing bill after bill, all designed to disarm, disenfranchise, or otherwise micro-manage peoples lives. She is probably the biggest legislative influence in Californicating our state. She has marred and scarred Oregon in too many ways to itemize and I will celebrate the day she is gone from power.

Unless you're on Ambien you must have noticed by now that the anti-Second Amendment crowd has let loose with a nationwide media blitz supposedly conceding the attempt to outlaw all weapons with magazines. They claim that 90% of Americans support universal registration of ALL guns and so they will concentrate on those bills instead.

The truth is universal registration was the only goal in the first place as it is an absolutely necessary step before guns can be taken from the populace. The whole hoopla about banning "assault weapons" was orchestrated to make Americans think they defended themselves when they're actually surrendering themselves.

Worked pretty good.
 
BrianFromWA said:
The right to bear arms isn't a "problem", big or small. You said so yourself.

Now, if you want to stop people from owning guns who've committed violent crimes or are under psychiatric care, you have my support. Wait, I think that's already a law, right?
Click to expand...

Yes, it is many laws. And there are many tens of thousands of people caught breaking those laws every year. And the Obama administration refuses to prosecute more than a handful of them. Last year they let about 60,000 violators skate without even charging them with anything.

Because that's not his goal. His goal is 2 part. First to find every gun in America, then take them all away. Can't do the last part without doing the first part first.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
I have no problems banning assault rifles fully.

As to sending troops to Niger, I trust Obama is making a good decision. He has advisers and he certainly deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but what exactly is an "assault" rifle? It appears to me, any rifle could be used to assault someone. BP, you're falling into an easy trap for low information voters.
 
Last edited:
Well, if this were to pass I would most likely move. I have two handguns, and I'm not about to get rid of one just because the state has decided that a pistol is an "assault weapon".
 
Natebishop3 said:
Well, if this were to pass I would most likely move. I have two handguns, and I'm not about to get rid of one just because the state has decided that a pistol is an "assault weapon".
Click to expand...

I'd just be a lawbreaker. Fuck it.

What those on the Left hate is that the Constitution has to mean something. If you don't like it, there's a perfectly good amendment process. Can't get it through? Too fucking bad you won't get your way.
 
maxiep said:
I'd just be a lawbreaker. Fuck it.

What those on the Left hate is that the Constitution has to mean something. If you don't like it, there's a perfectly good amendment process. Can't get it through? Too fucking bad you won't get your way.
Click to expand...

Yeah bitches! Even if you change the law or the constitution we're just going to break it anyways! It's our constitutional right to ignore the constitution if we don't agree with it!
 
Natebishop3 said:
Well, if this were to pass I would most likely move. I have two handguns, and I'm not about to get rid of one just because the state has decided that a pistol is an "assault weapon".
Click to expand...

Oh gawd, guns are really that important to you. People who are that into their guns kinda creep me out.
 
MickZagger said:
Oh gawd, guns are really that important to you. People who are that into their guns kinda creep me out.
Click to expand...

That into their guns?

One of them I've owned since I turned 21, and the other I bought a few years ago for concealed carry on a job. They were/are completely legal, and now I'm supposed to just give them away because the state decided to change how they define "assault weapon"? Fuck that. That's completely bullshit.
 
Natebishop3 said:
That into their guns?

One of them I've owned since I turned 21, and the other I bought a few years ago for concealed carry on a job. They were/are completely legal, and now I'm supposed to just give them away because the state decided to change how they define "assault weapon"? Fuck that. That's completely bullshit.
Click to expand...

If you really think that the state is going to outlaw pistols thats whole nother level of paranoia.
 
Look, I don't own a gun personally but I grew up in a household that had tons of guns. I think I shot my first rifle at 8 years old and a .357 when I was 12 that knocked me on my ass.

But, I don't understand this paranoid mentality by Republican's that the government wants their guns and they need to stock up on guns to fend off them damn looters for when Doomsday comes so they have something to defend themselves from the evil sinners that want to come onto their property and take over their family type stuff.

Get real. Seriously.

A.) You watch too many movies.

B.) You're giving the government waaaay too much credit.

I see that type of thinking in this thread too.
 
MickZagger said:
If you really think that the state is going to outlaw pistols thats whole nother level of paranoia.
Click to expand...

It's in the bill..... did you read it? I swear, some people are so quick to say "conspiracy theory" and "you're paranoid".... IT'S IN THE BILL! BLACK AND WHITE.
 
You do understand how bills work, right? They actually have to be passed. There has been thousands of bills out there proposed. Doesn't mean its got a chance of happening.
 
MickZagger said:
You do understand how bills work, right? They actually have to be passed. There has been thousands of bills out there proposed. Doesn't mean its got a chance of happening.
Click to expand...

It illustrates the thinking that these people have though. They're not just going after assault rifles, like the AR-15, they're pretty much going after anything that's semi-automatic.

You know what I don't understand? You say the people who are pissed about all the new anti-gun legislation are creepy and paranoid, but those are the people who are least likely to commit a crime. They're the ones who actually registered their guns, went through all the proper steps, and follow the laws. Why criticize and punish those people when it's the ones who break the law that are doing all the killing?

The shooting at Clackamas Town center? Stolen gun.

The shooting at Newtown? Stolen gun.

Explain to me how passing these laws will stop those kinds of shootings from happening? All you're doing is punishing the people who actually care and follow the laws. Seems pretty illogical to me.
 
Natebishop3 said:
It illustrates the thinking that these people have though. They're not just going after assault rifles, like the AR-15, they're pretty much going after anything that's semi-automatic.

You know what I don't understand? You say the people who are pissed about all the new anti-gun legislation are creepy and paranoid, but those are the people who are least likely to commit a crime. They're the ones who actually registered their guns, went through all the proper steps, and follow the laws. Why criticize and punish those people when it's the ones who break the law that are doing all the killing?

The shooting at Clackamas Town center? Stolen gun.

The shooting at Newtown? Stolen gun.

Explain to me how passing these laws will stop those kinds of shootings from happening? All you're doing is punishing the people who actually care and follow the laws. Seems pretty illogical to me.
Click to expand...

Whats the point of getting so heated about it to call Democrats 'boneheads' and 'condescending jerkoffs'. Seriously, that's a lot of anger and hate for a bill proposed by some kind of loonies that probably doesn't have much backing even by super liberal Democrats.

Then to mention Doomsday type shit and why you need your guns for when people want to come for your family? Come on. Seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top