In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 196
Online now 116 Record: 4850 (6/6/2012)
The home for discussion on USC athletics
FightOn247 message board for off topic posts
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Are you sure? Is it bottom loading? Does it have a barrel shroud?
Cry Havoc; and let slip the dogs of war!
I suspect you may have your terminology confused since neither of those features/aspects make a difference in the legality of a weapon under current law.
In CA, your centerfire rifle with a detachable magazine is not an assault rifle unless you add one or more of the following features: pistol grip; thumbhole stock; folding/telescoping stock; grenade/flare launcher; flash suppressor; or forward pistol grip.
It is amusing that you accuse the left of buying votes with spending cuts. The right is far more ambitious. It uses tax cuts in addition to spending to bribe voters, forces citizens to pay money to their cronies, and tries to suppress votes of those that would vote against them.
Are you so dense that you believe I did not realize what he was doing? Are you really that thickheaded? Although he was being facetious regarding the actual disasters, he was being serious in his accusation that Obama predicted dire results. I responded to the serious part. Do you need any other assistance with reading comprehension?
By the way, does being an asshole come naturally to you, or do you have to work hard at honing your tremendous skill? I am curious. It is my understanding that you are deeply religious, more specifically Christian. Does't Christianity teach modesty and love? Is my understanding of Christianity wrong or my understanding of your devotion to the religion wrong?
This post was edited by Morethanafan 13 months ago
Your understanding of just about everything is wrong ...
The now defunct assault rifle ban included barrel shrouds that could be used as hand holds. On guns like AR's you need a fixed magazine (i.e. top load) and a "bullet button" in CA.
This post was edited by phear_SC 13 months ago
This is clearly not true and an amazingly simplistic analysis. I am all for calling people out for tilting at windmills, but we'd all do better if we acknowledged that not everyone on one side of the political spectrum is dumb and of nefarious intent.
“Close tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share,” Reagan vowed.
The Republicans have been doing the same over defense spending cuts. Grow up.
i hope that after you asked this question you realized who you were talkin to.............................
I guess that reasoning makes it either incorrect or acceptable?
Btw, the whole "immature" flame/slam is so...infantile.
"...an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough jobs or enough profits" JFK
The AWB's restriction on barrel shrouds only applied to semi-auto pistols, not rifles. You can't have a semi-auto rifle without some sort of covering over the barrel, otherwise you'd have nowhere to place your forward hand without burning it.
You absolutely do not need a fixed mag in CA. If you have a fixed mag, great - then the restrictions on assault rifles do not apply to you. If you have a detachable mag, then you need to have a bullet button in CA and you are limited as to the other features you can have (launcher, telescoping/folding stock, etc.).
No, but your stupid use of 'Barry' to refer to your President and your one-sided analysis of who is playing politics with 'fear' here makes you look like an ass. And, yes, infantile. Let's discuss these things rationally.
There is no moral or economic argument for the type of spending the democrats want. They are either complete fools or of nefarious intent. You CANNOT have a socialist democracy in a diverse setting. It just barely works (and, only until the midrun at best) in small culturally homogeneous societies as it is. Why small culturally homogeneous societies you ask? Because if everyone is more or less tightly grouped into a single class (with relatively few outliers) and are going to spend their income on similar things for a similar purpose then the gov can take over the spending. By contrast, when people have a wide mean variance in income and they all want different things for different reasons government control then becomes an immoral impediment to freedom. So, what about the moral argument? The simple answer is that:
1-A) The ultimate sense of fair is that you get to keep what you earn and I get to keep what I earn.
1-B) People bare personal responsibility for the good and bad outcomes in their life.
2) Where there is unfairness in the system it should be corrected to allow for equal opportunity.
But the liberal response is to bypass cause and effect and simply take money from the successful at a higher rate than they take from the less successful and redistribute it. How does that HELP anyone grow and develop as a person? The only argument for this is that there are inequalities in the system - but libs don't want to equalize the system. They want to equalize the outcome based on whatever their own view of "groups" and outcomes should be. Such an approach is immoral and ultimately creates economically destructive incentive. You don't help your children by doing their homework for them anymore than you help people by paying their rent for them (with MY money).
So - the conclusion is obvious. Either they are all a bunch of idiots who can't do math (i.e. This spending is patently unsustainable - even if they raise taxes [#laffercurve]) and actually believe redistribution is long term effective or they damn well know it's unsustainable and don't care because the free crap gets them votes and it won't be their mess to clean up.
Seriously. Have you looked at the debt lately? Why is it the dems REFUSE to cut entitlements? Because that's what's good for the country or because appealing to the selfishness of low information idiots is all they have going for them?
I don't think it's simplistic at all. That's really the gist of the whole damn thing and it's criminal.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by phear_SC 13 months ago
That is funny coming from you.
And I will call Barack whatever I like. That is my right. And when he earns my respect, I'll give him that to him. Right now he is not a leader I can respect. Unfortunately, I have to follow his leadership because he was voted in by our system of democracy. But I don't have to respect him till he earns it in my eyes.
And if you think I'm an ass and have one sided analysis then don't dialog with me. Its very simple.
I'll have to re-check on the barrel shroud.
You said the same thing I did in more words about loading: it is either fixed mag top loading or bullet button.
We've officially entered The Sequestration Zone.
Is everyone intact?
MeMBeR SiNcE 9/11/2011
MaY GOD BLesS ThE U.S.C. TROJAN'S, AnD AMeRiCA,---FoR ALLL ETeRNiTY!!!
Join the fight for YOUR liberty!
I still have hope that one day you might stop being an ass. I don't know about you but, even though he was the worst President we might have ever had, I never called President Bush 'shrub' or something dumb. He was the head of state. He was still my President. I think as a patriotic American I can oppose the policies of my President without being disrespectful to both my President and, by extension, his office.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports