Perry County Mo Sheriff Assault Weapo...

Perry County Mo Sheriff Assault Weapons Ban

Posted in the Perryville Forum

First Prev
of 4
Next Last

“zero nuclear weapons”

Since: Sep 08

Perryville

#1 Jan 24, 2013
What is wrong with our Sheriff not wanting to ban assault weapons?
saying that he would not obey laws if passed to ban these weapons.

As a Sheriff you would think he would support this!!!

This ban will not take away a persons right to own hand guns or or a civilian rifles like for hunting. Just assault weapons which no civilian needs.

md

United States

#2 Jan 24, 2013
nebka wrote:
What is wrong with our Sheriff not wanting to ban assault weapons?
saying that he would not obey laws if passed to ban these weapons.

As a Sheriff you would think he would support this!!!

This ban will not take away a persons right to own hand guns or or a civilian rifles like for hunting. Just assault weapons which no civilian needs.
Sounds like the sheriff has a little more sense than you do. Move to New York with the rest of the do-gooders.

“zero nuclear weapons”

Since: Sep 08

Perryville

#3 Jan 24, 2013
md wrote:
<quoted text>
Sounds like the sheriff has a little more sense than you do. Move to New York with the rest of the do-gooders.
So why do you think a civilian needs a assault weapon surely not for deer hunting.
you can't fix stupid

Alexandria, VA

#4 Jan 24, 2013
nebka wrote:
What is wrong with our Sheriff not wanting to ban assault weapons?
saying that he would not obey laws if passed to ban these weapons.

As a Sheriff you would think he would support this!!!

This ban will not take away a persons right to own hand guns or or a civilian rifles like for hunting. Just assault weapons which no civilian needs.
Just because a weapon is black or has a pistol grip doesn't make it an assault weapon. It's the person behind it that makes it an assault weapon. I can take my 22 put a different stock on it with a forward grip and pistol grip and it will look like and fall into the ban but it is still nothing more then a 22.(respectfully) You really need to read more about the ban and understand guns before making a comment. The proposed ban also includes handguns that have magazines. A gun is an inanimate object that can do nothing on it's own, it need a person behind it. Any ban is nothing more then a stepping stone to the next and anti-gunner want them all. Any gun ban goes against the constitution and is illegal. That is why he said he will not enforce it.
If they past a law that said you can no longer speak out at public rallies would that ok or how about if they said you can have your freedom of religion as long as it is not Muslim because they are radicals? From my point of view the answer is no.
you can't fix stupid

Alexandria, VA

#5 Jan 24, 2013
nebka wrote:
<quoted text>So why do you think a civilian needs a assault weapon surely not for deer hunting.
You can use an AR-15 (so called assault weapon) for deer hunting if you so choose. You just have to make sure the magazine is limited to 10 rounds. It is an ideal gun for youths or beginners because of it's lite weight and little recoil (that's the kick it has when it's fired if you didn't know). You need to find the video from the LA riots in the early '90s when the lone store owner stood on the roof and held off a mob of looters with an "assault gun" and you might understand the use they can have in protecting what is yours from those who would take it when the law isn't available.

“zero nuclear weapons”

Since: Sep 08

Perryville

#6 Jan 24, 2013
The time i went deer hunting all i needed was a bolt action rifle.

There ia some weapons a civilian has no need for like a BAR,Intratec TEC-DC9,or any actual full-automatic assault rifles.

I am for the Second Amendment but as i said there are some weapons civilians do not need to own
you can't fix stupid

Alexandria, VA

#7 Jan 24, 2013
nebka wrote:
The time i went deer hunting all i needed was a bolt action rifle.

There ia some weapons a civilian has no need for like a BAR,Intratec TEC-DC9,or any actual full-automatic assault rifles.

I am for the Second Amendment but as i said there are some weapons civilians do not need to own
There are already laws in place that deal with full auto weapons. And it is no easy task to "legally" get them. The current gun ban proposal going after semi-autos.
Not every one likes to hunt with a bolt action. And trying to teach a youngster how to use one is not the easiest. My dad loves to hunt and has bolt action rifles but prefers a semi-auto cause it is easier at his age.
The 2nd amendment isn't there just for hunters or even shooting sports. It is there to give those who choose to the right to own guns to protect themselves
you can't fix stupid

Alexandria, VA

#8 Jan 24, 2013
[QUOTE who="you can't fix stupid"]<quoted text>There are already laws in place that deal with full auto weapons. And it is no easy task to "legally" get them. The current gun ban proposal going after semi-autos.
Not every one likes to hunt with a bolt action. And trying to teach a youngster how to use one is not the easiest. My dad loves to hunt and has bolt action rifles but prefers a semi-auto cause it is easier at his age.
The 2nd amendment isn't there just for hunters or even shooting sports. It is there to give those who choose to the right to own guns to protect themselves[/QUOTE]
Sorry got cut off. The 2nd amendment isn't there just for hunters or even shooting sports. It is there to give those who choose to the right to own guns to protect themselves there family and property from those that would do it harm weather forign or "domestic". Without the 2nd amendment the 1st is meaningless. And don't think that if they pass and enforce this gun ban that they will stop. Look at China, Canada, England and Austrailia. Or look at 1930s Germany for a real eye opener.
You're ignorant

United States

#9 Jan 24, 2013
nebka wrote:
<quoted text>So why do you think a civilian needs a assault weapon surely not for deer hunting.
First and foremost, it's not an "assault weapon", it's a simi-automatic rifle. Go look up what an assault rifle truly is. Secondly, the second amendment is not about hunting; it's about defending liberty from tyranny.
If you lay down and let the government take away or freedoms little by little, you'll look back in 10, 20 or 30 years and say "wow, how could we let it get this bad?". Look at what the government already has their hands in. Almost everything. What you eat, what you drink, what medicines you can have, etc. So go ahead, be a sheep and follow along with all the other mindless, ignorant fools. Me? No. I'll stand up and do my part as a citizen of the USA to help keep or tainted system a little less polluted.
you can't fix stupid

Alexandria, VA

#10 Jan 24, 2013
nebka wrote:
The time i went deer hunting all i needed was a bolt action rifle.

There ia some weapons a civilian has no need for like a BAR,Intratec TEC-DC9,or any actual full-automatic assault rifles.

I am for the Second Amendment but as i said there are some weapons civilians do not need to own
Also what crime where any of these used in that would warrant them to be banned? The BAR if you are referring to the Browning automatic weapon falls under the automatic weapon law already. As for the other two are nothing more then a semi-auto hand gun that has it's magazine in front of the trigger which means nothing more then an inclosed bolt as to a slide like most semi-auto handguns other then that i guess it looks menacing.
Should we ban large SUVs cause a drunk gets behind the wheel and runs a school bus off the road killing all the kids on it. Do some Internet searching on the number of deaths from drunk drivers versus gun violence and I think you will be amazed. Or since a handful of Muslims all those on 9/11 should we ban planes or box cutters since they didn't use guns. Or maybe just ban Muslims in general?
You can't judge any thing, person or group based on crimes perpetrated by those that would do harm because of a moment of stupidity or act of terror. Like I said you can't fix stupid and if you intend on doing harm you're gonna find a way gun or no gun.
Laughing At Morons

Lees Summit, MO

#11 Jan 24, 2013
nebka wrote:
What is wrong with our Sheriff not wanting to ban assault weapons?
saying that he would not obey laws if passed to ban these weapons.
As a Sheriff you would think he would support this!!!
This ban will not take away a persons right to own hand guns or or a civilian rifles like for hunting. Just assault weapons which no civilian needs.
You are in no position to decide what civilians need.You don't know what you are talking about so run along and sit down and read a book or something.May i suggest you read a book on guns so you can educate yourself instead of bumpin them gums!!!!!
Because

Perryville, MO

#12 Jan 24, 2013
He took an oath to support and defend the constitution. The sheriff answers to "we the people". He has the power to evict and eject the
FBI, ATF, CIA, and any form of "federal" entity from our county.
It's our job to support him and the constitution. There has been a national wide uprising of sheriffs across this great land of ours.
They are standing up to the presidents attempt of treason. Yes...TREASON! How dare he use children to push this agenda!
Other dictators have used this same tactic.

I have lived in this county all my life. This is a great state as well.
But I will not tollerate any infringment of my rights, or my neighbors, whether they like the constitution or not. I am very prepared to do so
even if it means losing my own life. I am confident our sheriff and
his deputies, along will all other local law enforcement feels the
same way.

And as far as the mis-informed poster here who ask why we need certain
"types" of weapons. The answer is "because we can!" It's not about deer
hunting. The 2nd amendment was established to keep a rogue government
in check. Wake up. Our government is out of control.
nebka wrote:
What is wrong with our Sheriff not wanting to ban assault weapons?
saying that he would not obey laws if passed to ban these weapons.
As a Sheriff you would think he would support this!!!
This ban will not take away a persons right to own hand guns or or a civilian rifles like for hunting. Just assault weapons which no civilian needs.
Defender

Perryville, MO

#13 Jan 24, 2013
The 2nd amendment supports your right to comment on here...the 1st amendment. The second amendment should have been the first one, because without,
it wouldn't exist.

Don't tread on me.
Jay

United States

#14 Jan 24, 2013
[QUOTE who="you can't fix stupid"]<quoted text>Just because a weapon is black or has a pistol grip doesn't make it an assault weapon. It's the person behind it that makes it an assault weapon. I can take my 22 put a different stock on it with a forward grip and pistol grip and it will look like and fall into the ban but it is still nothing more then a 22.(respectfully) You really need to read more about the ban and understand guns before making a comment. The proposed ban also includes handguns that have magazines. A gun is an inanimate object that can do nothing on it's own, it need a person behind it. Any ban is nothing more then a stepping stone to the next and anti-gunner want them all. Any gun ban goes against the constitution and is illegal. That is why he said he will not enforce it.
If they past a law that said you can no longer speak out at public rallies would that ok or how about if they said you can have your freedom of religion as long as it is not Muslim because they are radicals? From my point of view the answer is no.[/QUOTE]

Great info!
Jay

United States

#15 Jan 24, 2013
You can tell those that have a good working knowledge of guns and those that don't.
Those who are unfamiliar with guns are crying "ban the guns".
Ignorance is bliss, so they say.
Come get them

London, KY

#16 Jan 24, 2013
I'm not one to point fingers but lets say if the government did itch towards sociallism handguns and shotguns and bolt actions won't stand up to a semi auto ar-15 or M4, I have an AK-47 and once you step on my land with ill intent I don't give a fuck if your a thief, swat, police, or a politician your no longer in America your in my world and if you try and take my stuff you better hope your a better aim then I am
Come get them

London, KY

#17 Jan 24, 2013
Also I have no problem with leaving my land to come get the ones responsible for ruining this once great nation, I'm done and fed up with them I will not budge another inch no more of my rights will be trifled with I AM MILITIA

“Byte Me — Doofus”

Since: Oct 12

Here.

#18 Jan 25, 2013
nebka wrote:
The time i went deer hunting all i needed was a bolt action rifle.
There ia some weapons a civilian has no need for like a BAR,Intratec TEC-DC9,or any actual full-automatic assault rifles.
I am for the Second Amendment but as i said there are some weapons civilians do not need to own
What will you do when the president is a socialist or a fascist, and he orders troops to attack ordinary citizens? Throw rocks?

The sheriff is correct. The 2nd Amendment was intended as a 'just in case amendment' to keep centralized power where it belongs—with the people and not the government.

'He who forgets history is condemned to repeat it.'
MGySgt - USMC retired

United States

#19 Jan 25, 2013
After reading so much misinformation posted by too many uninformed persons, I wish to add my thoughts on this issue. Though “gun control” discussions are almost always emotionally charged, my intent is not to further immature comments that serve only to reduce the topic to name calling. I fully understand that nothing either gun control advocates or those with the opposite point of view will persuade anyone to change their position.

As a gun enthusiast, I fully support the second amendment and the basic freedom it was and still is intended to afford our citizens the right to keep and bear arms.

I believe any ban on AR-15 type semi automatic rifles would be a definite and unacceptable infringement on one of our fundamental rights. First of all, it (AR-15) should not be classified as an assault rifle. After 26 years as an active duty United States Marine including multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, I feel I'm quite qualified and I do know what constitutes a military assault rifle.

Among the 50 firearms I possess, only one is an AR-15. It is not an assault weapon. Mine is not used nor intended to be used for self defense. It is a sporting rifle I use as my primary coyote control gun. Many of the areas I hunt involve getting to the area via use of an ATV or occasionally even by boat. Limiting weight and space of equipment are significant considerations. My little AR-15 M4 is ideal. It is compact, reliable and rugged. The extendable stock in conjunction with the pistol grip, make it easy to pack; easy to carry; and handy to use. Again, it is a nearly ideal for my purposes as a coyote control tool.

Further, the two 30 round magazines I carry full are all the ammo that I normally carry even on multiple day excursions. They make it unnecessary for me to pack or carry additional boxes and pouches for ammo.

Generally speaking, the little 223 (5.56 mm) cartridge, when used with capable and proper marksmanship, is not a bad little “all around” choice for this and many other areas where I hunt. It is quite capable of taking small game without wasting too much meat. Although not ideal for it, it still possesses the capacity to take larger game animals including deer and feral hogs should the need be encountered. So my AR fits a specific niche and perfectly fills my requirements for one of my styles of hunting and especially for controlling coyotes during off seasons.

Since I am retired (and single), I spend a lot of time hunting and fishing. I feel fortunate that I’m able to be in the field more than most people I know. These are just my personal thoughts from my perspective and are not meant to inflame or trample on other’s beliefs and positions on this sensitive subject, however I do feel it is a point of view, based on my personal experience that I’ve not observed in any other posts in this thread.

...Semper Fi....
you can't fix stupid

Alexandria, VA

#20 Jan 25, 2013
MGySgt - USMC retired wrote:
After reading so much misinformation posted by too many uninformed persons, I wish to add my thoughts on this issue. Though “gun control” discussions are almost always emotionally charged, my intent is not to further immature comments that serve only to reduce the topic to name calling. I fully understand that nothing either gun control advocates or those with the opposite point of view will persuade anyone to change their position.

As a gun enthusiast, I fully support the second amendment and the basic freedom it was and still is intended to afford our citizens the right to keep and bear arms.

I believe any ban on AR-15 type semi automatic rifles would be a definite and unacceptable infringement on one of our fundamental rights. First of all, it (AR-15) should not be classified as an assault rifle. After 26 years as an active duty United States Marine including multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, I feel I'm quite qualified and I do know what constitutes a military assault rifle.

Among the 50 firearms I possess, only one is an AR-15. It is not an assault weapon. Mine is not used nor intended to be used for self defense. It is a sporting rifle I use as my primary coyote control gun. Many of the areas I hunt involve getting to the area via use of an ATV or occasionally even by boat. Limiting weight and space of equipment are significant considerations. My little AR-15 M4 is ideal. It is compact, reliable and rugged. The extendable stock in conjunction with the pistol grip, make it easy to pack; easy to carry; and handy to use. Again, it is a nearly ideal for my purposes as a coyote control tool.

Further, the two 30 round magazines I carry full are all the ammo that I normally carry even on multiple day excursions. They make it unnecessary for me to pack or carry additional boxes and pouches for ammo.

Generally speaking, the little 223 (5.56 mm) cartridge, when used with capable and proper marksmanship, is not a bad little “all around” choice for this and many other areas where I hunt. It is quite capable of taking small game without wasting too much meat. Although not ideal for it, it still possesses the capacity to take larger game animals including deer and feral hogs should the need be encountered. So my AR fits a specific niche and perfectly fills my requirements for one of my styles of hunting and especially for controlling coyotes during off seasons.

Since I am retired (and single), I spend a lot of time hunting and fishing. I feel fortunate that IÂ’m able to be in the field more than most people I know. These are just my personal thoughts from my perspective and are not meant to inflame or trample on otherÂ’s beliefs and positions on this sensitive subject, however I do feel it is a point of view, based on my personal experience that IÂ’ve not observed in any other posts in this thread.

...Semper Fi....
Very well put and thank you for your service.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Perryville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
perryville tire 4 hr mary 20
Ty Elder's Kids 10 hr what 2
Robert Boesing 23 hr ArseCynic 2
I've dragged good people's names through the mu... Wed Yancy 50
News School Official: The Only Thing Women Know Is -... Wed Wjire 14
dont run from the cops Wed Wjire 76
Tony Pruisinowski Aug 25 Guest 2
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Perryville Mortgages