Guns Guns Guns !!!

Mr. Daystar

In a bell tower, watching you through cross hairs.
Here's a few of mine :jester:



2laaasz.jpg
4h1ce4y.jpg

47bwtnq.jpg
40a6u0o.jpg

OH NO...not the Illudium PU-36 explosive space modulator.
http://www.gargaro.com/MaRvInWaVs/disngrat.wav
 
Yep! My most proud addition to my collection!



2i7xque.gif
Why don't I see a Morita in there?


No sci-fi gun collection is ever complete without one... ;)
 

georges

Moderator
Staff member
update, just got this week a new dpms lower and a rock river lower to build.

rock river arms 1911 are very good guns, the only negative point they have is the small magazine capacity.
 
rock river arms 1911 are very good guns, the only negative point they have is the small magazine capacity.

this is true. i guess i should specify AR-15 lowers is what i got. today i got a lower parts kit a rock river upper and a stock.
 
I have two black Desert Eagles.One is a Daisy the other is a Tokyo Marui airsoft.The airsoft looks unbeliveably real and it comes apart almost exactly like the real thing.Tokyo Marui makes some top notch shit.They even have an airsoft mini gun!

Just for the record,I've got nothing against real handguns,only "idiots" with handguns.There are to many uneducated gun owners out there.And assault rifles and machineguns serve no purpose in the hands of everyday civilians,IMO.

No offence to those responsible gun owners out there.
 
Hello Mates.
My collection is small.
Handgun : smith & Wesson Model 642 .38 revolver
Shot gun : Mossberg 500 pistol grip 12 Gauge

Gun Control = Hitting your target.:thumbsup:
 
And assault rifles and machineguns serve no purpose in the hands of everyday civilians,IMO.

Until people have to rely on the every day civilians to protect them against the government. It happened once, it'll happen again. Ask the Jews why the Nazis had such an easy time rounding them up... because the Nazis took all their guns first.

Call me a kook. Call me a conspiracy wacko, but it's my belief that that is the whole intent of the Second Amendment... and a lot of constitution scholars will tell you the same thing.
 
Until people have to rely on the every day civilians to protect them against the government. It happened once, it'll happen again. Ask the Jews why the Nazis had such an easy time rounding them up... because the Nazis took all their guns first.

Call me a kook. Call me a conspiracy wacko, but it's my belief that that is the whole intent of the Second Amendment... and a lot of constitution scholars will tell you the same thing.

I agree completely.
 
Until people have to rely on the every day civilians to protect them against the government. It happened once, it'll happen again. Ask the Jews why the Nazis had such an easy time rounding them up... because the Nazis took all their guns first.

Call me a kook. Call me a conspiracy wacko, but it's my belief that that is the whole intent of the Second Amendment... and a lot of constitution scholars will tell you the same thing.

You make a good point,but do you think that it will ever get to that point?If so, then yes,civilians do need them, if not,then they don't.Plain and simple.
I'm not sayin get rid of guns altogether,I just think civilians don't need assault rifles.Shotguns,o.k.,bolt action 22's,sure,AK-47,HK's,M16's,I don't think so.Most are banned anyway,and they should be.

Hey I don't trust the government either,but I sure as shit don't trust some asshole down the street either.The real question is who's more dangerous,the government watching from afar or the asshole nextdoor casin' your shit while you're at work?:dunno:
 
I wonder how many people out there even realize that "assault rifles" people want to ban are basically exactly functionally equivalent to most of the semi-auto hunting rifles made by companies like Ruger, Browning, and Remington which the many anti-gunners don't have a problem with. The only real difference is one group has cosmetic differences that make it look scary and don't affect the functionality by more than the most marginal of amounts.

I place the term "assault rifle" along with things like "high powered rifle". Almost all rifles are high powered. It would be like watching a car go down the street and saying, "look a internal combustion engine car" instead of just saying it's a car like every normal person would. It's completely redundant. I think the term came about so the media could make them seem scarier than they are.

For the record, I trust my government the least, and yes it WILL get to that point. If all human history is any indication it's not a matter of if but when. At least the person down the street can only kill me. The government has the ability to enslave countless generations of people.
 

Philbert

Banned
Until people have to rely on the every day civilians to protect them against the government. It happened once, it'll happen again. Ask the Jews why the Nazis had such an easy time rounding them up... because the Nazis took all their guns first.

Call me a kook. Call me a conspiracy wacko, but it's my belief that that is the whole intent of the Second Amendment... and a lot of constitution scholars will tell you the same thing.

The reason it was easy to round up so many citizens wasn't particularly because there weren't armed Jews to resist; it was more due to the rampant cooperation of the German population, and the refusal to believe such a thing could happen by the Jewish population 'til it was too late to resist.
The Waraw Ghetto Uprising was a proud moment, but utterly useless as a military response; there was no expectation of victory, just a desire to resist to the end.
I can't see too far into the future, but one thing is not too reasuring...we have an all volunteer Military now; citizen soldiers are less likely to become a seperate political arm, and there could possibly be a change in political loyalties if the Military ever feels like the population is different than they are, a seperate and possibly hostile segment of the country.
There could be a need to resist, if politicians keep running conflicts like Iraq;I would not like goofy ideologies putting my ass in the line of fire with no plan to win or know where to go next, I can see a conflict forming in that direction.
We are at a crossroads each and every generation; the best defense is constant vigilance, and as long as the American people are a part of the political process, things will not come to an armed conflict.
This is a time of instant information, so we have the ability to keep track of what's going on around us. We only need to care, that's the hard part.
More and more, a military response by amateurs would be near useless againt current Military tech, and it isn't going to get easier with time. If the USA ever became embroiled in civil war again, it would be even bloodier than the last time.
And who would be fighting who?
I see it more likely segments of population centers, sorta like in the L.A. riots, becoming armed camps and then I wanna have plenty of clips ready to go.
No one area of the country, like in the 1860s, has any need to be autonomous.
 
You make a good point,but do you think that it will ever get to that point?If so, then yes,civilians do need them, if not,then they don't.Plain and simple.
I'm not sayin get rid of guns altogether,I just think civilians don't need assault rifles.Shotguns,o.k.,bolt action 22's,sure,AK-47,HK's,M16's,I don't think so.Most are banned anyway,and they should be.

Hey I don't trust the government either,but I sure as shit don't trust some asshole down the street either.The real question is who's more dangerous,the government watching from afar or the asshole nextdoor casin' your shit while you're at work?:dunno:

The point made often is that what are commonly called assault rifles are not assault rifles. AK-47's, HK, (I don't know what one you are talking about, MP5)? and M16's are illegal. The guns on the hit list are similar but not the same, and as it seems most politicians and newspeople are oblivious to this, they keep everyone else in the dark as well. A case of those that don't know making decisions for those that do.

On the subject of trust. I just watched a documentary on leaking chemical weapons various governments dumped off the coast of Canada, England, Australia, Italy and the US after the 1st and 2nd World Wars, and by the Russians until 1980. When government is asked about the existence of these leaky shells, they normally flatly deny this has happened. Notwithstanding this, they usually do a long study and "determine" that it poses no threat, and will cost too much to clean up. Several fishermen were permanently disabled when a leaky can of mustard gas from WWI ended up on the deck of their fishing boat. :dunno:
 

georges

Moderator
Staff member
In california they have still banned barrett rifles for some stupid reason because they said the rifle could blow planes which is false. They also wanted to ban the m1a1/m21/m14 in cali because it was an evil looking gun but they didn't succeed because some people of the national guard and the swat defended the weapon for its great services to the country.
 
While even I think a 50 cal rifle is a bit excessive I would never say that I people shouldn't own one. For the same reason I think cars that can drive in excess of 200mph are pointless but if someone wants one it's their right. Both are capable of being used to break laws... it's just a matter of how much of an asshole the owner is.
 
In california they have still banned barrett rifles for some stupid reason because they said the rifle could blow planes which is false. They also wanted to ban the m1a1/m21/m14 in cali because it was an evil looking gun but they didn't succeed because some people of the national guard and the swat defended the weapon for its great services to the country.

Good shot to take out a plane with that! Really good shot, like if it's still on the runway.

Biggest I ever shot was a heavy load in a .45-70 I can't see the $1 a shot I hear they get for a .50. Maybe one time, but I don't even know the energy on that 50 yards out. Bang, boom, like the 4th of July, it's over, (hopefully), at midnight.
 
Top