# The great gun debate thread.



## MannDude (Sep 18, 2013)

After a good discussion in IRC I figured I'd bring this over to the forum. We've got a culturally diverse member-base here so it's always interesting to get differing views on topics and ideas that are unknown or foreign to some people elsewhere.

As an NRA member, gun owner, and semi-active target shooter (like to go to the range at least twice a month) it's likely understood where I stand on these issues. What about you?

/queue debate opcorn:

EDIT: FYI my avatar is not actually me. But i'm sure I'll look like that in another 10-15 years


----------



## WebSearchingPro (Sep 18, 2013)

MannDude said:


> [...]
> EDIT: FYI my avatar is not actually me. But i'm sure I'll look like that in another 10-15 years


Good to know... I was wondering what was up with that


----------



## Jade (Sep 18, 2013)

Its osamaManndude  Hahaha jk.

This topic should be very active


----------



## drmike (Sep 18, 2013)

Guns should be in every civilized house.

Regulation of such is frankly pathetic.

Stripping gun ownership is near the top of the list every time tyranny comes knocking.


----------



## texteditor (Sep 18, 2013)

Shoot everybody

leave no survivors


----------



## texteditor (Sep 18, 2013)

Also I don't think denying people the right to buy guns based on, say, criminal background or mental health would be the worst thing.

There is a difference between buying them for self-defense/hunting/sport and buying them because you think RaHoWa is on the horizon.

Also everyone buying them as some kind of "anti-tyranny" vanguard is mentally stuck in 1800s America where Patriot Missiles and tear gas and tanks don't exist - Your $300 DICK's Sporting Goods semi-auto isn't gonna do shit to stop 'tyranny'.


----------



## drmike (Sep 18, 2013)

Background checks aren't particularly effective.  I've never agreed with them.  Punishment under law is to be proximate to the misdoings of the individual and often time limited (i.e. not open ended time without end).

People intending on inflicting mortal harm randomly aren't obeying laws ever.   So prohibitions won't stop them.

To regulate in such a way entices government to quickly populate the cannot buy lists with anyone they fear, dislike, have personal issues with, etc.   The mental health entries to disqualify folks are so open ended you could amend anyones name to the list without any due process or means to be removed from said list.  

Entirely agree, a pea shooter isn't effective defense against modern war weapons.    But, it certainly is better than resorting to throwing rocks.


----------



## MartinD (Sep 18, 2013)

I see no reason at all to own a gun. Period.


----------



## H_Heisenberg (Sep 18, 2013)

Guns are not the problem. The problem are the people behind them. Would you give a gun to a highly mentally instable person who tried suicide or something or a criminal? No, you wouldn't!


----------



## MannDude (Sep 18, 2013)

MartinD said:


> I see no reason at all to own a gun. Period.


Even if you don't believe the common man should have one, they have plenty of practical use. Farmers protecting their livestock from wild animals. Hunters.

Me? I like to target practice. It's rewarding and therapeutic to spend time at the shooting range. I've been hunting a few times and enjoy it, but would never hunt for 'trophy animals'. Only time I've hunted was coyotes and raccoons in Nevada that were preying on the birds on the bird refuge I lived/worked on and rabbit and turkey hunting, both of which was food for later that day. (Rabbit and turkey population was overran there as they thrived on the feed we left for the birds that were using the property as a refuge).

I'm trying to find someone to go deer hunting with, because I love deer meat. Hard to find in the store but doable, but expensive. Would love to have my freezer full of deer burger, deer salami and of course some good home made deer jerky!

And of course, in the event someone attempted to enter my home unlawfully they'd be met with with my 45 pointed at them. A simple, "Don't fucking move" while dialing 911 will do the trick. If I felt threatened further, or they intend to place harm, then well, god rest their soul. But the vast majority of folk, I believe, would never want to do that and would be a last resort. The same type of barbaric individual that would unlawfully enter your home is the same type of individual who would may be willing or capable of doing unthinkable acts of violence towards you. Maybe they just want your TV to pawn for money for drugs, maybe they want to tie you up and dismember you slowly and sodomize you with a bowling pin (?). Either way, I'd prefer not to find out and having a gun in the home would hopefully prevent that. Luckily I live in a small town with low crime. Most folk here are friendly and well adjusted members of society. Major crime here is just drug addicts druggin' away and domestic disputes.


----------



## Ishaq (Sep 18, 2013)

I am British what is a gun?

>_>


----------



## MannDude (Sep 18, 2013)

Ishaq said:


> I am British what is a gun?
> 
> >_>


A lot like a knife, a useful tool in some instances, fun to play with in others, and can also be used as a dangerous weapon


----------



## texteditor (Sep 18, 2013)

MartinD said:


> I see no reason at all to own a gun. Period.


I don't own a gun and probably never will, but I can think of 1 good reason to own a gun: Deer.

Seriously, fuck deer


----------



## MannDude (Sep 18, 2013)

texteditor said:


> I don't own a gun and probably never will, but I can think of 1 good reason to own a gun: Deer.
> 
> Seriously, fuck deer


Deer meat is sooo good. So much deer in Indiana, it's insane. I think you're in Indiana too. If I ever go deer hunting I'll ship you some jerky or salami.


----------



## texteditor (Sep 18, 2013)

MannDude said:


> Deer meat is sooo good. So much deer in Indiana, it's insane. I think you're in Indiana too. If I ever go deer hunting I'll ship you some jerky or salami.


Also if you don't kill them first, they'll kill you, likely by diving through your windshield

edit: Yup, still in Indiana, and deer salami sounds good


----------



## Cloudrck (Sep 18, 2013)

I was born and raised in Chicago that has/had (it's changing) some of the strictest gun control laws, yet has some of the highest deaths by gun. The people who typically own illegal weapons (assault) are the same people who break the law anyway. It just makes it easier for them to run into to someone's house since the inhabitants are less likely to be armed.

I was than stationed in North Carolina with much more leniant gun laws (open carry, assault weapons allowed) and I felt much safer. I think people are avoiding the issue by debating guns, when they should be figuring out what would cause another human being to kill another human being. Erase guns from existence, and people will kill with knives, take away those and rocks, etc..



texteditor said:


> Also everyone buying them as some kind of "anti-tyranny" vanguard is mentally stuck in 1800s America where Patriot Missiles and tear gas and tanks don't exist - Your $300 DICK's Sporting Goods semi-auto isn't gonna do shit to stop 'tyranny'.


I take it you've never been overseas in a tank against people with explosives (walmart quality). You'd be amazed at what a *group* of people with weapons can do against tanks. But I don't know why you equate tyranny with such weaponry, that isn't always the case.

If what you said was true, than we should be able to mow through a country easily with our superior firepower, but it's hard to kill human willpower with weapons


----------



## texteditor (Sep 18, 2013)

Cloudrck said:


> Erase guns from existence, and people will kill with knives, take away those and rocks, etc..


Yeah I'm gonna bet if we had some sort of sadistic contest where we killed as many people as we could there'd be some big variance in scores between 'gun' and 'knife' and 'rock'.


----------



## Cloudrck (Sep 18, 2013)

texteditor said:


> Yeah I'm gonna bet if we had some sort of sadistic contest where we killed as many people as we could there'd be some big variance in scores between 'gun' and 'knife' and 'rock'.


I would assume. But don't forget about the medevil weaponry. My point was no matter what is available, if someone wants to kill someone, or a large group of people they will literally use rocks. (think catapults).



MartinD said:


> I see no reason at all to own a gun. Period.


Had I not lived in a place where cops are rarely pratrolling, and on average take longer to respond than other locations, or If I lived in a privleged area my whole life I'd say the same, but I would still support the rights of others.


----------



## texteditor (Sep 18, 2013)

Cloudrck said:


> I take it you've never been overseas in a tank against people with explosives (walmart quality). You'd be amazed at what a *group* of people with weapons can do against tanks. But I don't know why you equate tyranny with such weaponry, that isn't always the case.


This was just me grasping at examples for modern military tech, skipping the obvious - drones


----------



## Cloudrck (Sep 18, 2013)

texteditor said:


> This was just me grasping at examples for modern military tech, skipping the obvious - drones


I've seen drones, but we never used any nor have I been attached to a unit with the, so I can't speak on it's effectiveness. Reportedly it's extremely accurate.

You bring up a good point, as "mainstream" technology increased, so has the "black market". Though less evolved I can see other groups attaining, creating drones. Do you think we'll be having this conversation about drones in the near future?


----------



## Pmadd (Sep 18, 2013)

I've never owned a gun, and probably never will but I go trap shooting with my girlfriend at least once a week.


----------



## MannDude (Sep 18, 2013)

Pmadd said:


> I've never owned a gun, and probably never will but I go trap shooting with my girlfriend at least once a week.


It's fun, isn't it? It's been a few years since I've done that but I don't have a good shotgun. That's next on the list. Do you rent it at the range or is it hers?


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Sep 18, 2013)

texteditor said:


> Yeah I'm gonna bet if we had some sort of sadistic contest where we killed as many people as we could there'd be some big variance in scores between 'gun' and 'knife' and 'rock'.


Well, if you want to judge lethality based on killcount:  Religion has been responsible for more deaths than any other single cause, but I don't see anyone trying to make superstition illegal yet.  (Just an example.  If you're religious, kindly don't derail an interesting topic with boring preaching - I don't care).

I'm with Manndude on several counts.  I game hunt, I do target/competition shooting, and the sound of my 45's hammer being drawn back is more incentive for an intruder to remove themselves from my home than anything I could yell at them.

I do believe that "defending yourself from government" is no longer valid - but not because of a "you vs military" situation.  For all of it's punishing stupidity, "democratic" governments have learned that you simply can't massacre your civilians - it turns them into martyrs, undermines your authority, and generally paints a big ol' target for some other superpower itching for an excuse to stick their dick somewhere.  Restriction and outlawry works so much better;  and not just on the firearms front.  No better way to oppress a people than by systematically locking them down.  Then _they're_ the ones that have to break the law in order to protest.

There are plenty of very legitimate reasons to own various firearms.  There are few to no instances where taking those away from honest people does anything good.

There are very few reasons to own a firearm you do not use.  Collecting?  Render them inoperable - negates all danger, makes them worth less to someone looking to rob you, takes away any sort of govt excuse to have them taken away from you.  Owning a firearm "to be prepared"?  You're living in the wrong country to know what 'being prepared' truly means.

There is no reason whatsoever for a civilian to own working assualt-grade hardware.  Period.


----------



## Lee (Sep 18, 2013)

MannDude said:


> A lot like a knife, a useful tool in some instances, fun to play with in others, and can also be used as a dangerous weapon


The thing is, give everyone a knife instead of a gun and it will immediately drop the murder rate drastically.  Simply because most would not be so quick to attack someone for fear of getting hurt themselves.  That is the issue with guns, they are used by cowards.


----------



## Tactical (Sep 18, 2013)

Good ole .45 can't beat a lot stopping power. I prefer the old ma deuce (.50 cal) for killing some deer lol!


----------



## MannDude (Sep 18, 2013)

Aldryic C said:


> There is no reason whatsoever for a civilian to own working assualt-grade hardware.  Period.


Define 'assault grade'. I assume you just mean fully auto, right?

Most people complain about AR15s. Pff. They're just hunting rifles with more or less stupid and un-needed 'taciti_cool' _attachments. But still fun as hell to shoot. Some want to pass laws (and some states have) stating you can't have more than X amount of rounds in a magazine. Do I _need_ 30 round magazines or a 50 round drum? No. But I also don't need a car that goes more than 85mph. Not the government's place to tell people what they do and do not _need_.


----------



## Tactical (Sep 18, 2013)

Actually some ppl do need a 30 round clip or drum cause they spray and pray.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Sep 18, 2013)

MannDude said:


> Define 'assault grade'. I assume you just mean fully auto, right?



I would classify 'assualt' as a weapon intended to neutralize an armed, opposing force.  Burst/Automatic weapons, tactical shotguns, non-competition APR Pistols.  Same goes for ammunition.


I personally see no harm in someone being able to go down to a gun range, rent an old M-60, and use it on-premesis to work off some stress blowing away soda cans.  I'm having a very hard time trying to justify why someone would need to own a large-capacity weapon.



MannDude said:


> But I also don't need a car that goes more than 85mph. Not the government's place to tell people what they do and do not need.


While very true, it's a 'damned if you (do|don't)' situation.  We shouldn't need anyone to tell us that murder is morally reprehensible, or that you shouldn't take other people's things.  I can see the need for restriction, without it escalating to regulation.


----------



## MannDude (Sep 18, 2013)

Aldryic C said:


> I would classify 'assualt' as a weapon intended to neutralize an armed, opposing force.  Burst/Automatic weapons, tactical shotguns, non-competition APR Pistols.  Same goes for ammunition.
> 
> 
> I personally see no harm in someone being able to go down to a gun range, rent an old M-60, and use it on-premesis to work off some stress blowing away soda cans.  I'm having a very hard time trying to justify why someone would need to own a large-capacity weapon.
> ...


I agree with you, but around here, there is a lot of rural land. The folks who go to gun ranges do so because they can't walk out their back door and do that on their own property. Whether it be because of being in city limits, not having property that is ideal for shooting on (flat, neighbours surrounding you, etc) or perhaps they just go to a shooting range as it's a way to meetup or see other individuals who share a common interest and passion.

But about an armed 'opposing force', I suppose any weapon could be classified as one that could be used like that. Even a little .22 plinker. But keep in mind our right to bear arms is indeed due to the threat of opposing forces.



> This right was described by Sir William Blackstone as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state.


----------



## bzImage (Sep 18, 2013)

Always be prepared to return excessive fire. When I don't have to listen to a search helicopter fly over my house for 20+ passes (like I had to listen to last night for an hour straight starting at around 3AM) I will consider giving up my guns.

In the mean time, despite the fact I live in a decent neighborhood the above scenario took place, bad guys exist, I *don't* have to worry about people breaking into my house, or stealing my car. Why? Because I own fire arms and as much as I hate Florida, they have written some half decent laws that allow me to protect myself and my home.


----------



## wdq (Sep 18, 2013)

I grew up around guns. I remember going out and hunting pheasants, turkeys, and deer with my my family starting when I was very young. I got my first shotgun of my own when I was 13, a year or so before that I took a hunter safety class and started shooting trap for my school's team.

Currently I own a couple of 12 gauge shotguns, a 0.50 caliper deer hunting muzzle loader, and a 0.22 caliper pistol. Of course all of these weapons are dangerous, but I have the experience and maturity it takes to use the weapons safely.

I have some family members who have AR style guns, but are set to semi automatic mode so they don't break any laws in my state. For something like deer hunting the AR style guns are a little overkill, but I don't really see the need to ban them or anything like that.


----------



## Tactical (Sep 18, 2013)

Me personally I dont care if any tom dick or harry own a gun. It's scarey when I hear about cases when children get a hold a parents gun and its not even put up in the correct storage place. Thats what chaps my ass! I do believe if you teach your children at a young age how to handle guns and show respect for them. They will grow up with a better understanding of what the use of gun is intended for. Shoot im teach my six yr old how to shot a 4-10.


----------



## KuJoe (Sep 18, 2013)

I had a gun for home protection but since moving to Colorado, my brother ended up moving into a sketchy neighborhood so I let him hold it instead since our neighborhood is a lot better than any neighborhood I lived in in FL.

That being said, I've been wanting to get a revolver so bad since I started shooting my dad's .357 last year. Semi-autos are nice and have their purpose, but I just enjoy wheelguns more. I would love to get a Chiappa Rhino some day for conceal carry.


----------



## MannDude (Sep 18, 2013)

wdq said:


> I grew up around guns. I remember going out and hunting pheasants, turkeys, and deer with my my family starting when I was very young. I got my first shotgun of my own when I was 13, a year or so before that I took a hunter safety class and started shooting trap for my school's team.
> 
> Currently I own a couple of 12 gauge shotguns, a 0.50 caliper deer hunting muzzle loader, and a 0.22 caliper pistol. Of course all of these weapons are dangerous, but I have the experience and maturity it takes to use the weapons safely.
> 
> I have some family members who have AR style guns, but are set to semi automatic mode so they don't break any laws in my state. For something like deer hunting the AR style guns are a little overkill, but I don't really see the need to ban them or anything like that.


Lot of folk like that around here too. Good people.

As they say, the best 'safety' is 'between your ears'.


----------



## Tactical (Sep 18, 2013)

That chiappa rhino is alot of gun! Point that a nose of a burglar! I bet he would run! fast!


----------



## drmike (Sep 18, 2013)

I remember when kids use to bring guns to school for school clubs.

No one ever was shot, none of the issues of today with youths and firearms violence.

When people says guns = cowards, that's not really true.  I've been shot before by an armed robber, in the back.  The robber was cowardly, no doubt.   Had I been carrying then, I would have at least had a chance to take him down and out.

Firearms at the greatest equalizer to exist.   A 90 pound woman can stop a rapist dead cold in a millsecond.  An 80 year old home owner can bag a home invader.  Thugs and street violence suddenly don't have a monopoly on the neighborhood.

In all my years, having lived in some big cities and having seen quite a bit of up close violence, one thing I still hate messing with is a damn knife.   The chances of bleeding out from a knife wound are mighty high.  Gunshots, they don't scare me, I know how they feel.  It's manageable.


----------



## blergh (Sep 18, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> Guns should be in every civilized house.
> 
> Regulation of such is frankly pathetic.
> 
> Stripping gun ownership is near the top of the list every time tyranny comes knocking.


I lol'd. Not that i thought any less of you.


----------



## RiotSecurity (Sep 18, 2013)

MannDude said:


> After a good discussion in IRC I figured I'd bring this over to the forum. We've got a culturally diverse member-base here so it's always interesting to get differing views on topics and ideas that are unknown or foreign to some people elsewhere.
> 
> As an NRA member, gun owner, and semi-active target shooter (like to go to the range at least twice a month) it's likely understood where I stand on these issues. What about you?
> 
> ...


I'll make the USA government a deal, I will get rid of all my guns if they get rid of the presidents childerns armed body guards and he gets rid of his body guards.

Since we know that'll never happen you can understand why I'll never get rid of a gun.


----------



## pcan (Sep 18, 2013)

I believe that the urge to own a gun is mostly a USA thing. It probably makes perfect sense on that framewok, but it is not a global issue, not in my country at least. Most of the world seem to cope fine without widespread gun adoption. I live in Europe, near the shooting range of my town. I see very few people going there, because very few people wants a gun (it is legal for hunting). Due to low demand, there is a single armory in the town. Speaking of direct experience, I used a gun only once, during the mandatory military service. The experience to manage a gun was so alien to the people that, on that occasion, at least one attempted to grab the gun by the (hot) barrell after firing a full magazine. When the mainstream local press reports about USA gun massacres, the usual attitude is to iterate around the line "why they want to buy guns?". The journalists are suggesting a widespread bad judgement, but I belive this i actually yet another instance of the "we are better than them" human self-delusion.


----------



## Tactical (Sep 18, 2013)

When i was deployed overseas my m-4 was like an extension of my body, Never left it alone and cleaned it  before each time we had to go on raids and patrols. Man that rifle was my best friend she loved me and i loved her!


----------



## drmike (Sep 18, 2013)

An armed public is the enemy of the State - or at least a speed bump in many.

There are plenty of armed European countries.  Switzerland comes to mind.   Funny their tradition of gun ownership and never having been overrun by invaders in modern times.

Serbia, the provincial kicking post of insurrection and outside interference, another place with high gun ownership.

Finland doesn't lag far behind Switzerland in per capita ownership.

In all these countries, I don't see the "high" gun violence.

In total incidents, the US has a problem with gun violence.   These acts aren't say legal or even sane people though.  Most of it is criminal activity.  Drug violence is a big chunk.  Domestic violence is a another.  This is why the US has criminal sentencing enhancements for crimes involving a firearm.  You get time for the crime plus more for the gun terror.

Folks handling firearms incorrectly?    In military setting?   Grounds for reprimand for multiple folks there.


----------



## twolf (Sep 19, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> Switzerland comes to mind.   Funny their tradition of gun ownership and never having been overrun by invaders in modern times.


We only have such a high quota because military service is compulsory for men, and you are allowed to take your service weapon home with you. Officially you're not allowed to retain any ammunition though since 2007. So you can't really compare that with the United States.


----------



## drmike (Sep 19, 2013)

@twolf,  what is this ammunition prohibition part about?


----------



## jarland (Sep 19, 2013)

You'd have to pry them from my dead fingers.


----------



## twolf (Sep 19, 2013)

You can't really speak of a prohibition. Members of the Swiss Army used to receive a small amount of ammunition to keep at home so that they could be instantly ready in case of an emergency. You were only allowed to open that ammunition pack after an official war mobilization, so the only actual use that ammunition ever saw was misuse (mostly in suicides). So the practice was discontinued, and the already distributed ammunition withdrawn.

Everybody (without criminal record) is still allowed to obtain a license and purchase/own guns. But the quota of gun ownership is very low if you don't take the army service weapons into account. Still smaller if you subtract the hunters.

Edit: Oh, and since you are required to keep guns and ammunition separate and out of reach of third parties, using them for home defense is a pretty risky proposition. The time you'd need to get the stuff out and ready...


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Sep 19, 2013)

Issued, owned firearms without ammunition (especially a firearm you've been trained to use) actually makes a lot of sense.  Should an invasion-type scenario happen, it would be relatively simple to stage ammunition dispense points where folks could show up and be issued rounds for a weapon they already have.


----------



## jarland (Sep 19, 2013)

Aldryic C said:


> Issued, owned firearms without ammunition (especially a firearm you've been trained to use) actually makes a lot of sense. Should an invasion-type scenario happen, it would be relatively simple to stage ammunition dispense points where folks could show up and be issued rounds for a weapon they already have.


Until the issuer and invader become one and the same


----------



## drmike (Sep 19, 2013)




----------



## MannDude (Sep 19, 2013)

buffalooed said:


>


StarBucks was really pro-gun and gun friendly. They did the sensible thing and left it up to the local state to decide what rules they shoudl enforce, and had no company firearm policy (just like Wal-Mart).

Too bad some bored scared sheleted suburban housewives had nothing better to do after they dropped their kids off at school and in between picking them up, so they caused a ruckus. Then that ruckus was met with pro-2A folk who'd organize StarBuck appreciation days and would open carry in their stores. Leave it to some idiots who'd bring their shotguns, AR's and AK's to give most others a bad name.

StarBucks still doesn't really give a flying fuck if you carry in there. They won't ask you to leave if they see it. They're only producing a statement over it because they don't want to be in the middle of the debate, and not because the CEO is against or for any side more than the other. Just they got caught in the middle of 'mothers against being bored' (or something, I forget) and the pro-2A folk.


----------



## drmike (Sep 19, 2013)

Mothers being bored   Star*ucks is one of those useless chains where suburban MILFs lounge spending the poor working fellows money all day long.  Sad what they get people to pay for a cup of joe.

Star*ucks around here are pretty empty.  Certainly corporate welfare for them to continue being opened.

I support the locals when and where I can.

If it wasn't for firearms and firepower, these mamas would be speaking Russian or Chinese, if they weren't force aborted or eradicated otherwise.

What's that saying about why Japan was never dumb enough to physically attack the US mainland?   Something like a gun behind every blade of grass   Let's keep that idea alive.


----------



## MannDude (Sep 19, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> What's that saying about why Japan was never dumb enough to physically attack the US mainland?   Something like a gun behind every blade of grass   Let's keep them idea alive.


Maybe it has something to do with us having over 300,000,000 citizens with over 270,000,000 guns? Well, at-least the ones they know about.


----------



## drmike (Sep 19, 2013)

270 million guns?   Come one, we all have 2 hands.   600 million guns is the target.  Slackers.


----------



## Shados (Sep 19, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> Mothers being bored   Star*ucks is one of those useless chains where suburban MILFs lounge spending the poor working fellows money all day long.  Sad what they get people to pay for a cup of joe.
> 
> Star*ucks around here are pretty empty.  Certainly corporate welfare for them to continue being opened.
> 
> I support the locals when and where I can.


Around these parts, Starbucks was more or less doomed to fail, and did. Doubly so for Melbourne; we have a ludicrous number of cafes, and they're all a hell of a lot better than Starbucks.


----------



## ChrisM (Sep 29, 2013)




----------



## HostUS-Alexander (Sep 30, 2013)

Guns are illegal here


----------



## imperio (Sep 30, 2013)

MannDude said:


> EDIT: FYI my avatar is not actually me. But i'm sure I'll look like that in another 10-15 years


Well, I guess your next social topic will be about drugs


----------



## KuJoe (Sep 30, 2013)

imperio said:


> Well, I guess your next social topic will be about drugs


He changed his avatar after he posted that.


----------



## MannDude (Sep 30, 2013)

HostUS-Alexander said:


> Guns are illegal here


Boo! Where are you? I understand not everyone thinks they should be used, but even as a sport they're a blast. If you ever get the chance to go to a range to shoot at paper targets or something, go for it! Are people in your area allowed to hunt?



imperio said:


> Well, I guess your next social topic will be about drugs





KuJoe said:


> He changed his avatar after he posted that.


This.

But I have been to Vegas more times than I can recall... Over 20 times atleast.


----------

