don't worry guys, obama just wants to take AK's away from criminals

I also realize that he would not be the king of America, and could not do whatever he wants, this is still a democracy.

I have seen this at attemp at justifying voting for Obama many times on gun boards. You know, it's OK to vote for Obama because he really can't enact his agenda of anti-gun legislation. Yeah, like he will have a hard time getting Kennedy and others to submit new anti gun bills. Or that he would not hesitate to appoint anti gun liberals to any supreme court openings.

It anyone free choice to vote for Obama, just don't try and convince people that it would not have a negative impact on gun owners.....we know better!
 
sound advice

He quit delivering pizza after that, and I think he has a carry permit now, this was some time ago.
 
I'm calling BS. Brand new member hates AKs, could "live without them", and has a friend that was robbed with an AK twice (even once is extremely unlikely), but he didn't report it to police so there is no way to verify the story. Wouldn't a pizza joint require a police report in order to forget about missing cash? Otherwise it would seem a whole lot like he stole it himself and made up a crazy story...

I don't buy it. Go back to Democratic Underground.
 
I have seen this at attemp at justifying voting for Obama many times on gun boards. You know, it's OK to vote for Obama because he really can't enact his agenda of anti-gun legislation. Yeah, like he will have a hard time getting Kennedy and others to submit new anti gun bills. Or that he would not hesitate to appoint anti gun liberals to any supreme court openings.

It anyone free choice to vote for Obama, just don't try and convince people that it would not have a negative impact on gun owners.....we know better!

this is a trick used by the left and the media. Obama may not personally take guns away, but all a bill needs is his signature.
 
I guess he could have made it up, but my friend is no thief. Since I was not there at the time of these incidents I can't verify it. I choose to trust my friends when they tell me about getting robbed.
 
And I choose not to trust you.

Aside from your lies about your pizza friend, you also lied about AKs being popular with criminals. That is just not the case. Check your facts before believing and promoting anti-gun gibberish.
 
I don't really give flying F&*# what you think. Don't call me a liar. This was a fairly civil debate until you started throwing personal insults. I'm not a democrat or a republican, I think for myself
 
So you think AKs are prime choices for criminals, eh?

Lets see some supporting information. Everything I have seen leads to quite the opposite conclusion.

Stating falsehoods as fact makes you a liar.
 
The media pushed "assault weapon" stories harder then handgun stories. In philly, they wanna consider an SKS an assault weapon. The term "assault weapon" was invented to scare the public. the AK is indeed the posterboy for the anti's, but very few crimes are committed with AK's.

Actually, rap music glorifies "glocks"
 
obviously more crimes are committed with handguns but here are a few examples of ak crimes


The Stockton schoolyard massacre - On January 17, 1989, Patrick Purdy killed 5 small children and wounded 29 others and a teacher at the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California, using a semiautomatic AK-47 assault rifle imported from China. That weapon had been purchased from a gun dealer in Oregon and was equipped with a 75-round "drum" magazine. Purdy shot 106 rounds in less than 2 minutes.9"School Killer's Last Days" and "The Kinds of Guns School Killer Used", San Francisco Chronicle, January 19, 1989.

The Louisville, Kentucky, workplace massacre - On September 14, 1989, Joseph Wesbecker killed 7 people and wounded 13 others at his former place of work in Louisville, Kentucky, before taking his own life. Mr. Wesbecker was armed with an AK-47 rifle, two MAC-11 assault pistols, and a duffle-bag full of ammunition.10"Rampage in Louisville", Atlanta Constitution, September 15, 1989.

The CIA headquarters shootings - On January 25, 1993, Pakistani national Mir Aimal Kasi killed 2 CIA employees and wounded 3 others outside the entrance to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. Kasi used a Chinese-made semiautomatic AK-47 assault rifle equipped with a 30-round magazine purchased from a Northern Virginia gun store.11"CIA Killings Prompt Scrutiny on 2 Fronts; Fairfax Loophole Expedited Gun Purchase", Washington Post, February 11, 1993.

The Branch-Davidian standoff in Waco, Texas - On February 28, 1993, while attempting to serve federal search and arrest warrants at the Branch-Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, four ATF special agents were killed and 16 others were wounded with an arsenal of assault weapons. According to a federal affidavit, the cult had accumulated at least the following assault weapons: 123 AR-15s, 44 AK-47s, 2 Barrett .50 calibers, 2 Street Sweepers, an unknown number of MAC-10 and MAC-11s, 20 100-round drum magazines, and 260 large-capacity banana clips. The weapons were bought legally from gun dealers and at gun shows.12"Cult's Massive Weapons Purchases Stir Up a Furor Over Federal Regulation", Fort Worth Star-Telegram, May 2, 1993.

Two Border Patrol agents wounded in cross-fire between rival gangs - 04/29/2003 According to reports, one agent was shot in the right arm and the other received gunshot wounds to his upper torso. The victims were allegedly shot at with an AK-47 assault rifle, which penetrated through the back of the vehicle and the car seats before they struck the two victims with great impact. "No exit wounds were found on the victims," Luna said.

http://www.ak-47.us/Crimes_with_the_AK-47.php

there are a lot more, you want me to keep going?

Rifles are not the criminals' weapon of choice, but AK-47s are inexpensive and well made, that makes them popular with all gun users, including criminals
 
I wasn't talking about individual incidents, I was talking about percentages. I could dig up thousands of crimes where bolt-action rifles were used, but that does not mean they are a prime choice for criminals. You are just trying to use emotion to overcome logic, and that doesn't accomplish anything unless you are willing to let scare tactics destroy your critical thinking.

Rifles are not the criminals' weapon of choice, but AK-47s are inexpensive and well made, that makes them popular with all gun users, including criminals

Wrong. AKs are far more popular with regular gun owners than criminals. That's the verifiable truth.
 
All I ever said originally about the AK-47 was that I don't see a personal need for one. If you do, then by all means own them, I support your right to own AK-47s. I never once said that the crimes committed by them justifies an AWB. All I said is that they are not practical weapons or tools for hunting and everyday self defense. I also never said that I was going to vote for Obama, that is another one of your assumptions. A couple of my friends have them, and they are fun as hell, but I dont see a need to own one. Sure in the United States criminals don't often use AK-47s but in a lot of the world they are a tool of genocide and mass murder, o and did I mention terrorism. The reason why these "criminals" use them is because they are cheap and widely available.

I guess you don't consider terrorists to be criminals?
 
dr.j, do you understand that there is a significant difference between actual select fire AK-47s and the semiautomatic (and often neutered in other ways) Kalashnikov pattern rifles available to civilians? If you go to Coal Creek Armory or Guns & More, you'll see many of the latter and none of the former.

Terrorists use AKs because the Soviets handed them out like candy. True terrorists have used semiauto Kalashnikovs in one instance in the US, namely the CIA shooting (which you were able to pull out quickly because crimes with assault weapons are fantastically rare and make the news easily).
 
Maybe we should ban propane tanks. They are cheap and widely available. I don't have a use for them. They can be fun as all get out at a bar-b-q for propane tank owners but I don't need one. Oh yeah, terrorists used them to kill two of my buddies at once. It's the individual not the weapon. In England, criminals started using swords. So now in King Arthur's realm, one cannot own a sword. Will we subject ourselves to the same treatment?
 
It's really easy to make any of those off the shelve AK's into full auto weapons. Not that this is safe to do, or legal. But it can be done. Anybody with a file can do it.

A propane tank is not even in the same league as a gun, that's just dumb. Many people do need propane to heat their homes.

I'm not suggesting that anybody ban AK-47s where do you guys keep getting this?
 
A propane tank is not even in the same league as a gun, that's just dumb. Many people do need propane to heat their homes.

Try shooting a beer can with 12 gauge buck shot at point blank range. That will show you what I've seen a propane tank do to a fully up-armored HMMV. Now shoot it with a bb gun (that's what an AK will do to a hummer).

By the way, many people need AK-47s for home defense in third world countries, that's why we allow them to keep a limited amount per household. Many people here also need battle rifles for home-defense/life/liberty/property/etc...
 
It's really easy to make any of those off the shelve AK's into full auto weapons. Not that this is safe to do, or legal. But it can be done. Anybody with a file can do it.

No, it's not. Any weapon imported into the US (which includes all Kalashnikov pattern weapons) are required by law to not be readily convertible to select fire.

I'm not suggesting that anybody ban AK-47s where do you guys keep getting this?

You are putting out myths that serve as "proof" for those who do want to ban them. Those myths need to die and they only way to do that is to confront them every time they appear. It's as simple as that.
 
If I needed a battle rifle to defend my home in the United States, I would move to another part of town.

People can always bump fire an AK, it works pretty well and requires no modification

In the interest of not arming the liberals with anti-gun rhetoric, I'm going to respectfully admit defeat in this argument. All I really ever meant to say is that I don't need an AK, I respect your right to own one if you want. Your passion for this is fairly overwhelming and I hate to say it but I have wasted enough time on this.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top