You can buy the parts state side to turn it full auto. I've fired one before and despite it being semi-auto you can get off all 6 rounds in 2 or 3 seconds. The AR also comes in many calibres I've seen some online that were modified to shoot .50 cal rounds.
Turning it full auto is a felony, and it requires some pretty fine machining skills.
It is still classified as a restricted weapon in Canada, right? I haven't checked in forever.
I talked to a guy in security that actually has a CCW permit here in Canada. He said it was a pretty complex progress to go through in order to get it. He actually had to prove that his job involved situations where he might need a weapon to defend himself.
The shooter in Colorado did have to get a background check done before he purchased his weapons. All that showed up was a traffic ticket. Even if you required him to pass an extensive safety course, considering he was a med student it probably wouldn't have been a problem for him to pass it. He spent up to 6 months preparing himself for the incident. Crazy.
Here's my feeling: Freedom without regulation is no freedom at all. Think of a world without laws. Think of a world without red lights or stop signs. Think of a world where every person on earth carried a gun. Think of a world where there were no consequences to lying, or stealing, or cheating. Because that is a "free" world. True freedom is the dominion of psychopaths; it is the land where might is right.
When people say they want freedom, this is not what they are asking for. They want the good parts of freedom without the bad, yet they denounce governments when politicians attempt to accomplish just that.
Freedom in the positive sense is something to be cherished. But what many need to realize is that regulation and positive freedom are symbiotic. Yes, regulation without freedom is tyranny, but so is freedom without regulation.
I never suggested a lawless society.
The laws are there for our protection and to punish individuals who's actions endanger other people.
Regulations only serve to babysit everyone, whether they deserve to be punished or not. Being able to proudly say "Mind Your Own Business" is something that becoming more and more rare as people live in a dream world where they try turn our planet into a giant, boring rubber room.
Should people be able to go to the movies and not be murdered? Absolutely.
People should also be able to walk to the 7-11 and not get plowed over and slaughtered by a drunk driver... but there are 7 billion other people out there doing their own thing. If their own thing negatively affects you... there are laws to punish them.
I'm all for these laws and wish there was a nice medieval style death penalty for everyone convicted of first degree murder, second degree murder, rape and treason.
But you can't go around pre-punishing everyone to stop something that hasn't happened yet. That's all regulations serve to do.
One more example:
Let's ban alcohol outright. Alcohol, like a gun is unnecessary. Screw all the responsible drinkers... there are too many other drinkers out there who get behind the wheel and kill people that should live to be 100. So, no more drinky for you. We're regulating your leisure time and interests so we may or may not save a life.
If booze is the gun and drinking & driving is pulling the trigger... actually screw it, let's ban cars while we're at it and have the government regulate our a$$es onto buses and trains... it will save the lives of no less than 40,000 people a year in North America, so it's worth the cost to our freedom, right?
And you think my disdain for leftys is shocking? In my right-tilted view it seems logical (and never take an attack at a particular political leaning personally... it's a debate of subject matter, not a name calling hate rally on individuals)
I shouldn't actually say that someone could have shot back. Nothing better than having two people shooting guns in a crowded movie theatre that is dark and is filled with tear gas. That, plus the actual movie is loudly playing.
Would have probably been a disaster.
Also, the drum style magazine that the shooter had was 100 rounds in capacity. Crazy.
I shouldn't actually say that someone could have shot back. Nothing better than having two people shooting guns in a crowded movie theatre that is dark and is filled with tear gas. That, plus the actual movie is loudly playing.
Would have probably been a disaster.
Also, the drum style magazine that the shooter had was 100 rounds in capacity. Crazy.
anyone that purchases a drum magazine for an assault rifle is not all there, JMO.
I don't get what the benefit is either. 3x the ammo, 3x the weight. Balance is off...accuracy is off. There is a reason military members don't use them.
I don't get what the benefit is either. 3x the ammo, 3x the weight. Balance is off...accuracy is off. There is a reason military members don't use them.
True, but when you're aiming at the human equivalent of fish-in-a-barrel, I would think the only thing that factors into hit/miss accuracy is that you're at least facing the crowd.
If you can manage that you'll have success in whatever sick goal you set out to conquer that day.
The laws in Canada are a 10 round magazine for rimfire ammunition for semi-automatic hand guns and rifles.
Magazines for centre fire ammunition are limited to 5 rounds for semi-automatic rifles and 10 rounds for semi-automatic handguns.
Fully automatic weapons are of course, prohibited, but that doesn't mean they aren't legally obtainable in the country. You'll need a grandfathered gun license, however, and are likely over the age of 55.
I'm the liberal but I have been for a long time a gun guy, and of course a responsible one.
The US is a unique issue, and I do not for one second think that massive restrictions to guns is going to solve this issue, the violence you are seeing in these kinds of shootings is a symptom of the problem, what that problem is I don't know.
In Iceland and Canada I know tons of gun owners, and almost zero gun violence in comparison to the states. Its something systemic with the US, maybe its the society, maybe its a complex combination of many things, culture of fame at all costs, horrible health care system that lets down mentally ill people, maybe its the fear culture of the media, maybe its the desperation people feel who struggle and fall to the standards of a country built on wealth and material things... Who knows, maybe all of these are dead wrong..
But what I do know, is that you could tomorrow ban all weapons in the US and these issues would still happen.
You're probably right that you'd still see these issues with a gun ban in the US. The difference though is it would make it tougher to access completely unnecessary weapons like assault and automatic weapons. So you'd see similar issues but with tamer guns that would reduce body count. The US 2nd amendment is a complete mess.
I haven't read the whole thread, but I know there's a gun debate going in here.
I just wanted to chip in and say there are several academic articles that suggest a nation's actions influence the way its citizens act. In other words, what the United States do overseas influences the general mentality, and therefore actions, of its citizens.
Now, I'm not saying this is the sole reason massacres like Columbine and this issue happen. However, it's just another possible explanation for why events like this happen. The United States throughout history have been one of the most violent nations in the world and that those violent actions overseas have permeated the general American culture.
If we look at the Canadian culture, for example, we don't see a fraction of the amount of violent crimes that the U.S. has. I know, there are numerous factors that go into a massacre like this one, but I thought I'd just throw that out there.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Pierre "Monster" McGuire For This Useful Post:
Don't know of this has been posted...but this is picture perfect from a first responder stand point...
Incredible.
__________________
But living an honest life - for that you need the truth. That's the other thing I learned that day, that the truth, however shocking or uncomfortable, leads to liberation and dignity. -Ricky Gervais
Because in America... Freedom trumps everything. Having whatever means possible to defend yourself against someone who may try to take your life is extremely important.
Freedom from having a guy barge into a movie theatre and randomly start shooting people also seems like it would be a pretty nice thing to have. I think that limiting people's ability to purchase weapons which only have the sole purpose of killing other people is a good thing and actually goes towards the prevention aspect of preserving life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Landa
It's not just about 'the gun' or having a gun. For some, who feel the left is slowly eroding away the true definition of freedom (freedom from regulation, freedom from excessive government control, etc), being allowed to own a gun is more of a symbol than anything else.
A symbol that can hold 100 rounds of murdering lead which has the only purpose of killing people. A gun isn't a symbol, a gun like the one used is an object that has the only purpose of killing other people. That is something that no one in a society should own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Landa
Being a right-winger myself, I agree with this, despite being a Canadian who's never owned or fired a gun, I can certainly appreciate how important they are as a symbol to American freedom in the eyes of true patriots (lefties, in my opinion, are anti-patriots).
What does that mean, someone who has a different political ideology is less of a patriot than you are - how do you even quantify patriotic views? I consider myself fiscally conservative and socially liberal, am I quasi-patriotic?
Actually this is a stupid statement which sounds more like something that I would hear on mid-afternoon QR770 call in programs than anything else
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Landa
If you think having those 3 guns is unnecessary, I'm interested to read your rant on what YouTube's FPSRussia (some kid from Georgia who, allegedly, fakes a Russian accent and is almost as popular as Lady Gaga) owns and has access to. Watching through his videos must be shocking to some of the biggest gun fans. With the exception of nukes, that guy has legally got his hands on just about every piece of firepower you can dream up.
I am confused as to how relevant this comment is to well anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Landa
To let the government decide, for other people, what is necessary or unnecessary, with respect to guns, because they 'fail to see why civilians would need a particular weapon' would just leave an argument open for the government 'failing to see why civilians needs more than 90hp in their cars' among a million other examples of support of more and more government control over our lives in the name of treating grown adults like children.
God damn I hate the slippery slope argument. Such a stupid argument with little thought put into it. Seriously give me one good reason that someone would need to have an assault rifle at all, let alone one with a 100 round magazine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Landa
7 Billion People on this planet. If you spend your leisure time among them, no amount of government control is going to afford you any guarantees in life. That's reality. We all live in it.
The entire argument again seems to be the slippery slope argument that banning handguns leads to society falling apart or something about how freedom of thought would be lost or something like that. It is about banning something that is continually used in mass murder and terror situations seems to be a good idea, especially when it isn't a revolutionary army, it is some nutbar who has planning going into a theatre and murdering innocent people.
I am sure that if George Washington was transported to 2012 an assault rifle with a 100 round magazine wouldn't be what he was considering when that the line was introduced, it likely had more to do with preventing an invasion by the British.
The Following User Says Thank You to Mean Mr. Mustard For This Useful Post:
I bet this has already been discussed, but I just seen it on Dateline from the PVR. I seen a couple saying they threw their 3 year old baby on the ground. Who the heck takes a young kid like that to a movie that late? Especially a movie like that.You really couldn't wait to watch it some other time?
The Following User Says Thank You to Champion For This Useful Post:
I fail to see why any civilian would ever need any of those weapons and why they should be allowed to obtain them by law.
A pistol grip or folding military style stock can be added to any rifle. That doesn't change how dangerous they are to the general public. The black colour doesn't change how dangerous they are either.
Unless you are talking about something fully automatic an assault rifle is just a pimped out semi-auto.
I bet this has already been discussed, but I just seen it on Dateline from the PVR. I seen a couple saying they threw their 3 year old baby on the ground. Who the heck takes a young kid like that to a movie that late? Especially a movie like that.You really couldn't wait to watch it some other time?
I hate to go grammar nazi in a thread like this but I have no idea why people use seen in place of saw. It instantly makes you sound moronic.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Magnum PEI For This Useful Post:
Turning it full auto is a felony, and it requires some pretty fine machining skills.
It is still classified as a restricted weapon in Canada, right? I haven't checked in forever.
I talked to a guy in security that actually has a CCW permit here in Canada. He said it was a pretty complex progress to go through in order to get it. He actually had to prove that his job involved situations where he might need a weapon to defend himself.
The shooter in Colorado did have to get a background check done before he purchased his weapons. All that showed up was a traffic ticket. Even if you required him to pass an extensive safety course, considering he was a med student it probably wouldn't have been a problem for him to pass it. He spent up to 6 months preparing himself for the incident. Crazy.
I'm sure some models are harder to convert to automatic than others. There are models that only require a hand file or piece of wire to modify. It is easy enough to find instructions on line.
Most semi-autos in Canada are non-restricted. I think a few may be classified as assault weapons and require a restricted PAL. If you can pass the test for non-restricted you won't have any problem passing the restricted test. Hand guns below a certain caliber are restricted weapons in Canada as well.
Canada's failed gun registry actually caused thousands of Canadians to get restricted licences. It just made sense if you had to do the one test to write both of them. The criminal check is the same for both. You actually save money by doing both at once.
Canada also has a classification called prohibited weapons. They include all fully automatic weapons and some pistols/rifles/shotguns with too short of barrels or too high of a caliber. Very few people have prohibited firearms licences.
Banning guns won't stop mass killings. The psycopaths will find other ways to kill. (bombs, poisonings, noxious gases) Guns are currently the easier option, but not the only option.
Since Colorado has concealed carry permits, I'm surprised nobody was packing in the theatre and was able to stop this lunatic.
The argument that banning certain categories of guns won't stop killing, meaning that it's pointless to do it is a ridiculous one.
Capital punishment doesn't stop killing, so why use it?
For that matters, all our nations laws fail to stop crime, so why have them?
It's a dumb argument.
The Following User Says Thank You to longsuffering For This Useful Post:
