Major Virgina Tech Shooting, 22 dead

When did this permit start, because the 1968 law made it illegal to own a lot of guns. I have never seen a conversion kit legally for sale either. No, some of the parts aren't the same on an SKS, but for all practical purposes it is a semi-auto designed AK substitute. How much does a Class III permit cost anyway, Jared? I'm sure all the fees, training, and details together putowning a full autoout of reach for the average Joe. You don't see them for sale anywhere either, so how could you get them? Let me ask you, whats to stop the government from coming and taking your guns away if every one of them is registered? Nothing. Thats why I'm not in favor of any more registration laws. Once you have universal registration, confiscation is the next logical step. Just ask people in England or Australia about it. Edited by: Colonel_Reb

Colonel_Reb said:

When did this permit start, because the 1968 law made it illegal to own a lot of guns. I have never seen a conversion kit legally for sale either. No, some of the parts aren't the same on an SKS, but for all practical purposes it is a semi-auto designed AK substitute. How much does a Class III permit cost anyway, Jared? I'm sure all the fees, training, and details together put owning a full auto out of reach for the average Joe. You don't see them for sale anywhere either, so how could you get them? Let me ask you, whats to stop the government from coming and taking your guns away if every one of them is registered? Nothing. Thats why I'm not in favor of any more registration laws. Once you have universal registration, confiscation is the next logical step. Just ask people in England or Australia about it.

Click to expand...

You know Col, I'm not sure about the costs associated with class III permits, information wasn't immediately available online. I honestly haven't followed gun legislation much in the last 5 or 6 years. It is definitely possible to buy full auto if you can pay the price (usually in the $2000 or above range). Everything varies by state anyway. I will tell you that the cost of obtaining a suppressor (which I believe is a class III item) for an AR-15 rifle in AZ would cost me more than the rifle itself ($800 plus).
I didn't mean to nitpick, you are right, an AK and an SKS are very similar, the magazine and the intended ammo capacity being the primary difference. I definitely see the point of view of fearing registration will lead to easier confiscation. I guess I just don't think we're at that point yet in our country and I think the fears are a bit exaggerated. However I will admit complete ignorance to how disarmament was handled in the UK and Australia. I will have to look into that further on my own.
I don't know if you've ever been to a local gunshow. If you have you know it's not hard for any old whack job to pick up some pretty heavy firepower there. If you can shell out $7000, you can pick up a .50 cal sniper rifle with just as much ease as a little .22 plinker. It just seems logical to me that there should be some more checks and balances involved, particularly in the transfer of privately owned firearms.

jared said:

I would even consider taking it further by making ALL firearms purchases go through some sort of registration system. We do it with cars, why not with guns?

Click to expand...

Because owning a car isn't guaranteed or protected by the Constitution of the United States, and a car isn't used for self-defense or to repel foreign invaders.

Picture yourself in New Orleans 24 hours after Katrina. Do you want a 9mm pistol, or would you prefer an SKS / AK-47, with or without a mod kit? It's better to have too much firepower than not enough, IMO.

Gun registration would be the first step toward confiscation. I like the idea of the government not knowing how many guns are out there, or who owns them. I don't trust them one bit. Let them wonder.

Gentlemen, the first thing evil dictators like Stalin (Communist) & Hitler (Nazi) do is disarm the populace, as it makes them more pliable for governmental control & tyranny. Gun registration is the first step!!!

Fyi, here's yet another solid article from the patriots at PrisonPlanet.com...

Gun Control Law Helped Campus Killer
Yet disarmament lobby and establishment media exploit tragedy to disarm more potential victims

Prison Planet | April 17, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson

In January 2002, a student at the Virginia Appalachian School of Law, Peter Odighizuwa, shot three people dead before other students were able to retrieve guns from their cars and put an end to the carnage before there was more bloodshed. Over thirty victims at VA Tech yesterday were denied that right as a result of a campus gun control law that helped the shooter pick off his targets at will.

A bill in the Virginia legislature last year that would have allowed students with concealed weapons permits to carry their guns at schools was killed, with VA Tech spokesman Larry Hincker heralding the move as action that would "help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus." How hollow those words sound now in light of eyewitness reports of how victims had to cower under desks as the killer calmly approached, their only means of defense throwing chairs or risking their lives by escaping out of high-rise windows.

"Isn't it interesting that Utah and Oregon are the only two states that allows faculty to carry guns on campus. And isn't it interesting that you haven't read about any school or university shootings in Utah or Oregon? Why not? Because criminals don't like having their victims shoot back at them," Gun Owners of America's Larry Pratt said yesterday. "That's why the American people want an end to this ineffective gun ban."

85% of Americans support the right of a principle or a teacher to have instant access to a safely stored firearm in order to defend the lives of students and prevent a school massacre, but a drive is already underway to disarm more victims and grease the skids for more horrors similar to what unfolded yesterday.

The talking points have already been disseminated and the disarmament lobby and the establishment media is doing it's best to exploit yesterday's tragedy to push for gun control.

George Bush mentioned a loving god.Let me see, there were 32 people killed and he's talking about a loving god.Hmmm.

speedster said:

George Bush mentioned a loving god.Let me see, there were 32 people killed and he's talking about a loving god.Hmmm.

Click to expand...

God didn't kill those people. What's your point? If your point is that you are tired of the pious platitudes and cliches,I am somewhat with you. If you are blaming God for this, get real man. The world is a evil place and it gets worse each day and that's our fault, not his. It won't always be this way.

My point is that there is no god and if you choose to believe that there is he sure isn't a loving one.

Speedster..if there is no God, How did we get here? If you are one of those people who actually believes in evolution, who put those elements in place to bring the human race about? Speedster, in all the years you have lived have you ever observed something coming out of nothing? I think it actually takes more faith to be a athiest than it does to believe in a God. Since you don't believe in God, what foundation do you build your moral compass on? I am not saying you don't have any morals, certainly not but I am curious on what foundation you build it on.

The solution here is to allow the faculty to carry concealed pistols. People object to students carrying handguns, but there is absolutely no good reason to object to professors carrying pistols for their own protection. They are by far the lowest risk group in America.

There were several professors in Norris hall where the shooter killed 30 people. If even one of them was armed, he could have stopped the guy before he racked up 30 kills. Instead, the professors were reduced to blocking his path with doors and desks.

It makes no sense to strip even the faculty of their ability to defend themselves.

The 2nd Amendment predates multi shot weapons, at least good ones.
When the 2nd Amendment was passed:

Very few people had single shot rifles, and most just had muskets when the law was passed. The population of the US was about 4 million people and most people lived on small farms.

Yeah, no kidding people didn't have rifles prior to 1800, rifled muskets didn't become common, even in the military, until after 1850. So now, as urbanized as this country has become, with gangs roaming the streets, and random violence such as this happening all the time, we don't need guns? I think I'll keep mine, thank you very much.


As for God not existing, you are free to believe as you wish, but a sinful nature and free will is why the act happened, not because of an unloving God. Edited by: Colonel_Reb

Colonel_Reb said:

Yeah, no kidding people didn't have rifles prior to 1800, rifled muskets didn't become common, even in the military, until after 1850. So now, as urbanized as this country has become, with gangs roaming the streets, and random violence such as this happening all the time, we don't need guns? I think I'll keep mine, thank you very much.


As for God not existing, you are free to believe as you wish, but free will is why the act happened, not because of an unloving God.

Click to expand...

Good points Colonel Reb! The 2nd Amendment was added to the Bill of Rights to protect citizens from criminals AND government tyranny (as they had just experienced from England/King George)!!!

Also, God gives us all free will, so I don't have a big problem if someone wants to be an atheist/agnostic/pagan, etc. (it's their life). However, I personally believe that tragedy happens in this world because of not just that free will...but mostly from all the sin/wickedness/evil of mankind (it effects the innocent too).

When the document was drafted, it didn't make sense for a guy to go on a mass killing spree.

What happens when some guy with a death wish walks in with a machine gun in a crowded area in a major city and starts shooting people. A bunch of people with concealed advanced weapons that they don't know how to use is supposed to stop him?
If gun manufacturing was more confined and gun permits were issued with much more control then the murder rate would drop.
Or, you should have two classes of citizenship. Class A citizens, who wouldn't have serious criminal records and have contributed to the United States either through military/peace corps/other service, positive philanthropy, or other positive contributions, should have easy access to gun possession(and easier airport waits and so on). Class B citizens should have to go through much more thorough checks.

This isn't perfectly fair and has loopholes, but I think the basis is a good idea.Edited by: Freedom

Dixie, I just re-added the part to my post about the sinful nature of man. Somehow I deleted it when editing the post earlier. Thanks for the reminder, and I agree.

Freedom said:

What happens when some guy with a death wish walks in with a machine gun in a crowded area in a major city and starts shooting people.

Click to expand...

He probably gets shot and killed by the police.

Maybe Don should ban gun grabbers like you.

After how many shots! Cops aren't around everywhere.


Ban me for what? Edited by: Freedom

Don can ban who he wants, and doesn't really need our recommendations on the subject. If someone is a troll, thats a different story, but just because we disagree with someone on one issue doesn't mean we should try to have them banished.

Hey, I'm a friend of Freedom and I agree with you guys in general about gun control, but Freedom does have an idea there with the classes of citizenship(he sort of got it from the book Starship Troopers.) I think he agrees with you too, but is getting a kick out of being right about something and let this thing drag to see if it was true.
A while back, he was wondering if the most vocal Second Amendment advocates were also really visibly Southern, i.e., display the confederate flag. Turns out he was right, at least on the board, though Reb is in Utah.

He also wagered that the most vocal gun protection advocates would be of, "Scotch-Irish" descent, because of a rough and tumble culture that came from living on the border between England and Scotland where there was hundreds of years of war.

Freedom is not that far removed from gang fights. He lives near one of the largest drug ports on the east cost in a city that has police roaming the halls of the schools. He's a nice guy and is wicked smart, but he has got a screw loose.Edited by: lightfire

Whats wrong with being "visibly Southern" and also being a Second Ammendment advocate? If visibly Southern means walking the walk instead of just talking the talk, then please, count me in. One of these days you Yankees will realize the need for some protection and will have to take action, the only question is whether it will be too late or not. Then maybe you'll remember us visible Southerners as a little more knowledgeable than you thought. I don't think my ethnicity has anything to do with it either, just an awareness of the situation and a desire to be ready for what may happen.

Say lightfire, where was all this wagering and wondering going on?

How do you do quotes where the white shows?
Col. Reb wrote: "Whats wrong with being "visibly Southern" and also being a Second Amendment advocate? If visibly Southern means walking the walk instead of just talking the talk, then please, count me in."

Nothing, I'm going to college in the South. "Visibly Southern" meant displaying the Confederate flag basically. It wasn't a positive or negative thing. He basically just said the most outspoken people would be proud Southerners.

It was going on in the mid west(Cleveland) actually. Neither of us are from there. After seeing the violent gun shot wounds in a hospital, we were both pro-gun ownership. That is why I think that he was being insincere.



P.S. Watch your terms too. Yankee doesn't mean northener everywhere and a lot of young northeners don't know that it means northener in the south. People called "Yankees" are descendants of the Pilgrims and Puritans usually in N.E., at least in the small towns. I'm not that Yankee. Only a quarter, the rest is Irish/French(via Quebec.)



Edited by: lightfire

When you said you are a friend of Freedom, you just joined the board, and he's from Massachusetts, I figured youare from the Northeast too. As for the term Yankee, to me it means anyone born in a non-Southern state. The term carpetbagger is a term used for Northerners who move South. Having said all that, if I have mislabeled you, then I sincerely apologize. By the way, what brought you to Caste Football? (We often ask this of each other) I came looking for info on white skill players.

Lots of interesting developments on this thread.

What happened to Freedom? He can's speak for himself anymore? Is he another one of those trolls who came here to study rednecks and racism for a college paper, like others before him?

People come on to this board and complain about the stereotyping of blacks and illegal aliens; yet, there is no hint of hypocrisy in stereotyping Southerners as 'the most vocal supporters of the 2nd amendment.' Why don't you go ahead and say what you mean: We're all a bunch narrow-minded, bigoted, gun-toting, pickup driving rednecks!

Do you guys know speedster, too?

lightfire, nice of you to out your friend and tell us all he has a screw loose.

And LOL @ deriving your stance on gun control from "Starship Troopers."

Starship Troopers, isn't that the name of a song by Yes?