Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
test
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 650
MoneyManMatt 490
Jon Bon 406
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
Starscream66 285
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
George Spelvin 273
sharkman29 256
Top Posters
DallasRain70868
biomed164180
Yssup Rider61760
gman4453559
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48943
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino43221
The_Waco_Kid37740
CryptKicker37276
Mokoa36497
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-02-2015, 02:25 PM   #31
Mr MojoRisin
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Sep 3, 2011
Location: Here
Posts: 7,567
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderConstruction View Post
They weren't asked, they were paid. Not like they did it for nothing
Almost next to nothing. I bought a Sig Sauer 40 cal a few years ago at a pawn shop. When that gun was brand new it retailed for almost 1200 dollars. I can't see the logic of giving that gun up at a buy back program for fifty bucks which is what they were giving people for Revolvers and Pistols. That's why I stated people were giving up junk that they didn't want any. But it wouldn't matter they weren't giving fair market value.

Jim
Mr MojoRisin is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 02:28 PM   #32
UnderConstruction
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 29, 2014
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,378
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin View Post
Almost next to nothing. I bought a Sig Sauer 40 cal a few years ago at a pawn shop. When that gun was brand new it retailed for almost 1200 dollars. I can't see the logic of giving that gun up at a buy back program for fifty bucks which is what they were giving people for Revolvers and Pistols.

Jim
You said they were mostly old, crappy guns though...
UnderConstruction is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 02:31 PM   #33
UnderConstruction
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 29, 2014
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,378
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin View Post
I am saying just what I stated. People will turn in firearms voluntarily if asked by the government. I believe it happened in Connecticut a few years ago. They called it a Firearm buy back program. They actually paid people for turning in a legal firearm. If I am not mistaken they paid anywhere from 25.00 to 150.00 depending on the type and cal of the firearm. There is no reason to turn in a legal firearm just because the Government be it Fed, State or otherwise says you should. I am sure most of the firearms that were turned in were probably junk anyway or even inoperable but the point is the request was made with the idea of reducing firearm possession without infringing upon 2nd amendment rights.

Jim
No they won't. What you said, basically, is that people will take $50-$150 for inoperable or old, crappy guns. Who wouldn't? They aren't going to turn in a gun like you mentioned in your above post. If they do, they're stupid and shouldn't have a gun in the first place.
UnderConstruction is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 02:35 PM   #34
Mr MojoRisin
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Sep 3, 2011
Location: Here
Posts: 7,567
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderConstruction View Post
You said they were mostly old, crappy guns though...
I would assume. Cause I can't imagine giving up something of value. But the whole point is they weren't turning their guns in for the money, you can go to a pawn shop and do that. They were turning them in because they were under the false pretense that if they did they would contribute to reducing gun violence.

Jim
Mr MojoRisin is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 02:38 PM   #35
UnderConstruction
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 29, 2014
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,378
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin View Post
I would assume. Cause I can't imagine giving up something of value. But the whole point is they weren't turning their guns in for the money, you can go to a pawn shop and do that. They were turning them in because they were under the false pretense that if they did they would contribute to reducing gun violence.

Jim
A pawn shop won't give you $150 for a broke ass gun. And you said you were SURE and that doesn't sound like an assumption. If they were old and crappy, sometimes even inoperable, how did they think that getting a non-working and/or crappy old gun off the street would somehow reduce gun violence?
UnderConstruction is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 02:43 PM   #36
rioseco
Valued Poster
 
rioseco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 26, 2010
Location: TheLoneStar
Posts: 1,082
Encounters: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider View Post
I am in great company in that belief, Cornholio!

Don't forget ignorant asshole, hate monger and mindless minion. Your posts indicate you are all of those things and even less.

You are easy meat not only for me, but for the neocon (Koch) machine who has used your innate ignorance and xenophobia to create an entire class of American serfs.

Who yo massa, dipshit?


Trod on idiot !
rioseco is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 02:52 PM   #37
rioseco
Valued Poster
 
rioseco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 26, 2010
Location: TheLoneStar
Posts: 1,082
Encounters: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderConstruction View Post
Xenophobia is quite rampant among low-information voters. Coincidence? I don't think so. Without information and context, you naturally fear difference. That's why he goes on about homos and Muslims. He doesn't understand them. He doesn't want to take the time to understand then. But he wants everyone to understand him?

To each his own I always say. If you choose to surround yourself with muslims who don't give a damn about our nation, good for you. Most of these people are dirtbags and cowards. Some refuse to stand and others even support ISIS, Al Qaeda or whoever the flavor of the month terror org. is from right here in our country and inside their protected mosque. So yes I do understand these miserable drains upon society. They have been considered and are not worthy of my acceptance.

As for the gays, it's just not my ticket but if you find greater comfort in the arms of a guy as AssPup does, then more power to you.
Great talking to you and not about you, if you noticed.
rioseco is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 02:55 PM   #38
Mr MojoRisin
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Sep 3, 2011
Location: Here
Posts: 7,567
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderConstruction View Post
A pawn shop won't give you $150 for a broke ass gun. And you said you were SURE and that doesn't sound like an assumption. If they were old and crappy, sometimes even inoperable, how did they think that getting a non-working and/or crappy old gun off the street would somehow reduce gun violence?
I don't know. But here's a project for ya ,go scout out a Gun Buy Back Program and interview those standing in line and see what kind of responses you get. Whether I am right or wrong about the condition of the guns or the reasons people have in participating in such a program. The Government's intentions are to remove guns from citizens ,that's the bottom line.

Jim


Jim
Mr MojoRisin is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 03:06 PM   #39
Ducbutter
Valued Poster
 
Ducbutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 25, 2012
Location: Ahead of you.
Posts: 868
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
Yes, the tyranny of a government that denies its citizens the god given right of armor piercing ammunition. Horrible. We'll have to rely on soft-points, hollowpoints, tracer and FMJ.

How will we manage?
Firstly, that M855 round is not designed to be armor piercing. It only has a steel core to achieve some specific ballistic characteristics. Both heavier and lighter rounds of 5.56 ammo do not have steel cores.
Be that as it may, the type of armor that round will penetrate is only the "soft" type. Unfortunately that is the type worn by most police officers. The question about that I have is, "Has there been some recent spate of police shootings using that round to penetrate their vests?" I'm pretty sure the answer is no. I've certainly heard nothing of the sort.
The truth is those vests that patrol officers wear can be penetrated by most any rifle round. At least anything larger than .22 . And the definition of "armor piercing" bullets, refers to pistol ammunition for that very reason. The administration is reclassifying the round as a pistol round because of the somewhat recent manufacture of AR "pistols".
It seems pretty evident that this is little more than a backdoor attempt at gun control.

Here's a good short article that explains the particulars much better than I can.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...e-real-answer/
Ducbutter is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 03:14 PM   #40
I B Hankering
Valued Poster
 
I B Hankering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: South of Chicago
Posts: 31,214
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducbutter View Post
Firstly, that M855 round is not designed to be armor piercing. It only has a steel core to achieve some specific ballistic characteristics. Both heavier and lighter rounds of 5.56 ammo do not have steel cores.
Be that as it may, the type of armor that round will penetrate is only the "soft" type. Unfortunately that is the type worn by most police officers. The question about that I have is, "Has there been some recent spate of police shootings using that round to penetrate their vests?" I'm pretty sure the answer is no. I've certainly heard nothing of the sort.
The truth is those vests that patrol officers wear can be penetrated by most any rifle round. At least anything larger than .22 . And the definition of "armor piercing" bullets, refers to pistol ammunition for that very reason. The administration is reclassifying the round as a pistol round because of the somewhat recent manufacture of AR "pistols".
It seems pretty evident that this is little more than a backdoor attempt at gun control.

Here's a good short article that explains the particulars much better than I can.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...e-real-answer/
+1
I B Hankering is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 03:46 PM   #41
rioseco
Valued Poster
 
rioseco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 26, 2010
Location: TheLoneStar
Posts: 1,082
Encounters: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
Yes, the tyranny of a government that denies its citizens the god given right of armor piercing ammunition. Horrible. We'll have to rely on soft-points, hollowpoints, tracer and FMJ.

How will we manage?

Tim,
Being young and naive only last a short while. After several decades of age they call it something less flattering. Do not believe that the feds stop at one type of projectile. They have never stopped. Look at it from the NFA OF 1934 to what your First Half-White Full Time Commie POTUS plans for the 5.56mm today. It never ends, they always come back for more, and each time another chunk of liberty is lost. Maybe it doesn't effect you so you don't care. Tomorrow it could be something different, maybe something important to you. What if no one else gives a damn ?

LINK :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law..._United_States
rioseco is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 03:58 PM   #42
Ducbutter
Valued Poster
 
Ducbutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 25, 2012
Location: Ahead of you.
Posts: 868
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducbutter View Post
Firstly, that M855 round is not designed to be armor piercing. It only has a steel core to achieve some specific ballistic characteristics. Both heavier and lighter rounds of 5.56 ammo do not have steel cores.
Be that as it may, the type of armor that round will penetrate is only the "soft" type. Unfortunately that is the type worn by most police officers. The question about that I have is, "Has there been some recent spate of police shootings using that round to penetrate their vests?" I'm pretty sure the answer is no. I've certainly heard nothing of the sort.
The truth is those vests that patrol officers wear can be penetrated by most any rifle round. At least anything larger than .22 . And the definition of "armor piercing" bullets, refers to pistol ammunition for that very reason. The administration is reclassifying the round as a pistol round because of the somewhat recent manufacture of AR "pistols".
It seems pretty evident that this is little more than a backdoor attempt at gun control.

Here's a good short article that explains the particulars much better than I can.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...e-real-answer/

One slight correction. one of my shooting buddies says that steel cored round was designed to pierce armor. I'll try to verify that.
Ducbutter is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 04:21 PM   #43
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

The new red was of the recent gun mfg of pistols to chamber the round, but lets all panic and claim it is another gun grab.
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 04:50 PM   #44
Mr MojoRisin
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Sep 3, 2011
Location: Here
Posts: 7,567
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducbutter View Post
One slight correction. one of my shooting buddies says that steel cored round was designed to pierce armor. I'll try to verify that.
I found a good video that tests the M855 Round in terms of it's penetration characteristics.

Jim



http://youtu.be/e1tAtW2JKRE
Mr MojoRisin is offline   Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 06:06 PM   #45
UnderConstruction
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 29, 2014
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,378
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin View Post
I don't know. But here's a project for ya ,go scout out a Gun Buy Back Program and interview those standing in line and see what kind of responses you get. Whether I am right or wrong about the condition of the guns or the reasons people have in participating in such a program. The Government's intentions are to remove guns from citizens ,that's the bottom line.

Jim


Jim
If that's the case, which I don't believe it is, is a terrible way to go about it. Do you honestly believe the govt wants your guns?
UnderConstruction is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved