Downright sick

[Joshu]

All right guys, this all happened about fifteen minutes from my house in a very quiet area. Apparently a somewhat disturbed ex-marine called to the police for a domestic. When they showed up he shot two of them in head as they approached the door. A third was also killed. In his possession he had a pistol and rifle. However, most shots came from his AK-47.

Now I know many of you are all for guns on here and it just got to me today. How many people need an automatic rifle to "defend" their home?...because I haven't heard of too many people having to use one. I personally see no reason to own more than one gun. This man had a track of mental illness and with all the gun laws still got his hands on several.

PITTSBURGH – Does the name Byran Uyesugi ring a bell? Odds are not. What about Robert A. Hawkins? Or Mark Barton? Terry Ratzmann? Robert Stewart?

Each entered the national consciousness when he picked up a gun and ended multiple lives.

Harper said Richard Poplawski, 22, shot Sciullo and Mayhle in their heads with an assault rifle as they approached the house. Kelly, a 14-year veteran of the force, responded to the call on his way home and was killed as he tried to assist the other officers, Harper said.

Officer Timothy McManaway, a 15-year veteran, was shot in the hand. Officer Brian Jones broke his leg.

Poplawski, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, was wounded. Harper said he will be charged with three counts of homicide.

The gunman said he didn't want his rights to carry guns infringed upon.
The right to bear arms was a big issue when people had bayonets.

No matter what your feelings on guns are, no one deserved what happened to those police officers today.

Please pray for their families. I think about seven kids now don't have a father.

[gimp19]

There's way too much b.s like that going on right now, plain sickening.

[TODD 2000 V6 CAMARO]

This was what I was talking about a while back in a thread when I said I don't see any reason why anyone needs to own an assault rifle. I got pretty well flamed for it, so I didn't respond. I'll let this thread be my response.
May God comfort these officers' families.

[96FirebirdFormula]

Well its like owning a fast car you don't need it but you like to play with it.

[Jeff_in_Atl]

All right guys, this all happened about fifteen minutes from my house in a very quiet area. Apparently a somewhat disturbed ex-marine called to the police for a domestic. When they showed up he shot two of them in head as they approached the door. A third was also killed. In his possession he had a pistol and rifle. However, most shots came from his AK-47.

Now I know many of you are all for guns on here and it just got to me today. How many people need an automatic rifle to "defend" their home?...because I haven't heard of too many people having to use one. I personally see no reason to own more than one gun. This man had a track of mental illness and with all the gun laws still got his hands on several.







The gunman said he didn't want his rights to carry guns infringed upon.
The right to bear arms was a big issue when people had bayonets.

No matter what your feelings on guns are, no one deserved what happened to those police officers today.

Please pray for their families. I think about seven kids now don't have a father.

99.9% of AK47s, AR15s, Mini 14s are not automatic rifles. They are semi-automatic just like a 9mm or a 1911 45 cal. They will only shoot 1 shell pre trigger pull. Why is it everybody assumes an "assault" rifle is automatic.

Guns don't kill people any more than cars or baseball bats kill people. People kill people. They don't do it by themselves. Don't even bother give me the crap about if they weren't here it wouldn't have happened. A guy in great Brittan takes a sword and attacks a police officer and it's the swords fault. The problem with this country is people don't or won't take responsibility for their actions. It's always someone or something else's is fault because my narcissistic ways tells me it can't be my fault. Sure I will go buy a house I can't afford and it's the banks fault for lending me the money.

[bru333]

The gunman said he didn't want his rights to carry guns infringed upon.

Well that just proves he's nuts. He didn't have the right to own guns anymore. His dishonorable discharge (if true) and/or protection from abuse order took care of that.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09094/960662-100.stm

Records indicate that Mr. Poplawski was dishonorably discharged from the corps during basic training.

http://www.examiner.com/x-3253-Minne...ssess-firearms

WTAE Channel 4 Pittsburgh is also reporting that Poplawski was the subject of a protection from abuse order. If true and the protective order is still in effect, then this too made him an illegible possessor since The Violent Crime Control Act of 1994 modified U.S. Code Title 18 § 922(g) to also make it illegal to possess or purchase a firearm while subject to such a court order.

Why is it everybody assumes an "assault" rifle is automatic.

Brain washed by the national media.

[raroZ28]

Guns don't kill people any more than cars or baseball bats kill people. People kill people.

x2.

I don't own a gun, but if I wanted to kill 3 cops I could find a way without a gun.

[MN6WS6]

"I personally see no reason to own more than one gun."

Do you have one car?
Do you have one family member?
Do you have one room in your house?

I have several weapons. Some of them are nostalgic (family tree) but three were purchased by me. I have two handguns and a so-called "assault" rifle just because I wanted it. I have two other people to protect in an 1800 square feet house and a gun in close proximity at all times. I have a concealed carry permit as well. The bottom line is I plan for the worst-case scenario and have had to use my weapon to defend myself.

It doesn't matter if you have 10 guns, or 1 gun, or no guns, when people snap they use whatever they have to kill with. The fact is that the liberal media and the now liberal government only want you to hear about the ones that are killed with guns so they can sway the people to allow them to pass laws to ban them. And you are buying into it 100%. So when guns are banned, then the only people who will have them are the ones that don't follow the law in the first place, which means the criminals will rule the world. Yeah, I want to live like that, and I'm sure you do too..........

[wolfdogs]

you know... i stated years ago, both on this forum and to my wife.. that things are going to get real bad in years to come when it comes to violence..... worse and worse...


just like i said youd see the camaro back in 2009 or 10

[FroSSty]

I am sorry to hear this happened. God Bless all slain officers. May they rest in peace. Our prayers are out for them and there family.

In other news...
Ist not me falt thees werds are spillt rong. Tha keybord did et! Is it your pencil's fault when a word is misspelled on your paper? The paper's fault? Your teacher's fault? Oh so then it would be Bush and his no child left behind crap...And Bill Gates' fault for allowing this keyboard to misspell my werds. REAL logical...

I got pretty well flamed for it

My apologies that you felt flamed. I was merely pointing out your flawed thinking and stating a more logical mindset. You truly believe that if semi-automatic rifles(oh sorry not scary enough, I meant ASSAULT WEAPONS) were gone, that criminals couldn't have used a bow & arrow, pipe bomb, ied, k-bar, club, slingshot, steak knife, butcher knife, tire iron, or(input other item here, use your imagination) to kill someone? Lets ban EVERYTHING that could kill a person. Starting with your f-body...

eta: He was NOT an ex-Marine! He was kicked out in boot camp for assaulting the drill instructor. You should probably edit your post Joshu...

[3800_Firebird]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I'm seeing alot of others saying similar things. Welcome to 21st century society. A society of extreme behaviors and intolerance.

It bothers me that gun control groups use incidents like this that wrench our hearts to get their agendas passed. That is sick, IMO.

God bless the families of all officers killed in the line of duty, not only the ones we hear about on the news.

[TODD 2000 V6 CAMARO]

I am sorry to hear this happened. God Bless all slain officers. May they rest in peace. Our prayers are out for them and there family.

In other news...
Ist not me falt thees werds are spillt rong. Tha keybord did et! Is it your pencil's fault when a word is misspelled on your paper? The paper's fault? Your teacher's fault? Oh so then it would be Bush and his no child left behind crap...And Bill Gates' fault for allowing this keyboard to misspell my werds. REAL logical...

My apologies that you felt flamed. I was merely pointing out your flawed thinking and stating a more logical mindset. You truly believe that if semi-automatic rifles(oh sorry not scary enough, I meant ASSAULT WEAPONS) were gone, that criminals couldn't have used a bow & arrow, pipe bomb, ied, k-bar, club, slingshot, steak knife, butcher knife, tire iron, or(input other item here, use your imagination) to kill someone? Lets ban EVERYTHING that could kill a person. Starting with your f-body...

eta: He was NOT an ex-Marine! He was kicked out in boot camp for assaulting the drill instructor. You should probably edit your post Joshu...

I find it hard to believe that a person inside their home could kill three officers when they were walking up to one's door with a k-bar, club, slingshot (Not many people are crack shots with those these days), steak knife, butcher knife, tire iron, or any other hand weilded weapon. THAT seems like flawed thinking to me. Of course, that is my opinion...kinda like you thinking that my opinion that the common person doesn't NEED semi auto military style weapons is flawed thinking. I was just staing my opinion in my original post. I simply don't see the need for a non-military, non-law enforcement person to own assault weapons. Whoa, wait...don't have a fit. I can hear your shifting in your seat and getting annoyed from here. When I say assault weapons, I mean military style weapons. Weapons whose sole purpose when they were designed was to kill people. That is NOT to say that I am against gun possession. I'm from Texas for crap's sake. I own a shotgun myself, and am interested in getting a concealed carry permit, just haven't taken the plunge. I enjoy skeet shooting, dove hunting, and target shooting. However, I have neever needed to own an AR-15, Ak-47, AK-74, M-4, M-16, M-247, BAR, or any other gun of that nature. I can see the appeal, they are very cool, and would probably be fun to shoot targets with. Then again, as I originally stated, I don't think anyone needs them. You can't tell me that if you have a shotty or a hand gun any larger than a .25 that you need anything else to protect your home. A .40 caliber slug to center mass is going to stop someone just as fast as a .556 round from your AR-15. You don't NEED the AR-15 or AK, you WANT them. They are cool toys. You like to play militia in your head and plan for your one man war with the governemnt (I'm betting on the government, I mean...look what they did to Iraq....TWICE!! ) when they come to take your weapons away . I understand. I just still don't see the NEED. I am also not diluded enough to think that criminals couldn't get them if they really wanted to, even if they were illegal for the general public to own. There are too many already in circulation for that. But if it made it harder for psychotic people who would kill innocent people, innocent police officers, they why would any logical person not want to at least try it. I have a very good friend who is a police officer and I hate to think of him falling to that same fate. Guns don't kill people, people do. I absolutely agree, but it is harder for people to kill people who are wearing body armor if they aren't using a weapon that was created with the purpose of piercing body armor. Again, just my $0.02. I know, I know, I am a radical leftist liberal who wants to take away your sweet precious guns. (read: Toys ) (Actually I'm not. I just don't see the freaking need for military style weapons to be in the hands of red necks and gang memebrs. )

[Joshu]

I know, I am a radical leftist liberal who wants to take away your sweet precious guns. (read: Toys ) (Actually I'm not. I just don't see the freaking need for military style weapons to be in the hands of red necks and gang memebrs. )

And this is where I agree. The cons of semi-automatic guns outweigh the pros. Screw the second amendment and quit hiding behind it. The British are not in our backyards anymore and we don't use muskets.

[FroSSty]

I find it hard to believe that a person inside their home could kill three officers when they were walking up to one's door with a k-bar, club, slingshot (Not many people are crack shots with those these days), steak knife, butcher knife, tire iron, or any other hand weilded weapon. THAT seems like flawed thinking to me.
Anything is possible bud. To assume that it couldn't happen would put a lot of lives at risk. I was using those as examples of items that could be used to kill someone other than a gun.

Of course, that is my opinion...kinda like you thinking that my opinion that the common person doesn't NEED semi auto military style weapons is flawed thinking. I was just staing my opinion in my original post.
That is good to have an opinion, flawed as it is or otherwise. It is called objective thinking and I would never expect anyone to have to keep it to themselves.(1st amendment)

I simply don't see the need for a non-military, non-law enforcement person to own assault weapons. Whoa, wait...don't have a fit. I can hear your shifting in your seat and getting annoyed from here.

Why is it always with this attitude that the only reason I should have something is if I "NEED" it. Is this not America where, as a citizen, I have three inalienable rights; Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...Why is it I should justify why I want something? If I want it, and the Constitution of America and the laws based on it say I can have it, who are you,or anybody, to ask me if it is needed? We don't NEED a lot of things.

When I say assault weapons, I mean military style weapons. Weapons whose sole purpose when they were designed was to kill people.

I don't know how to tell you this but that shotgun you have, or one similar, is being used currently in Iraq by armed forces. So is that pistol that you might get when you get your cpl. Why does it matter what it was designed for? Most modern hunting rifles were based on rifles used during WWI and WWII. And the original scope was used during the US Civil War. There are hundreds of thousands of these rifles in American and 99.9% of them are used legally for hunting, target shooting etc. I own a couple myself and I have never contemplated using them on a human. Same with my pistols, shotty etc.

That is NOT to say that I am against gun possession.

Who are you trying to convince?

I'm from Texas for crap's sake. I own a shotgun myself, and am interested in getting a concealed carry permit, just haven't taken the plunge. I enjoy skeet shooting, dove hunting, and target shooting.

I am from Michigan. It is one of the most liberal states around thanks to Detroit and the Unions. So being from Texas doesn't mean a thing. I use my firearms much in the same way. I'll be going turkey hunting in a couple weeks. So what is the difference?


However, I have neever needed to own an AR-15, Ak-47, AK-74, M-4, M-16, M-247, BAR, or any other gun of that nature. I can see the appeal, they are very cool, and would probably be fun to shoot targets with.

They are fun to own and shoot targets with. Fun for hunting too. I am sure there are plenty of people that would say the same thing about our f-bodies, stamps, coins, beanie babies etc.

Then again, as I originally stated, I don't think anyone needs them.

See above...

You can't tell me that if you have a shotty or a hand gun any larger than a .25 that you need anything else to protect your home. A .40 caliber slug to center mass is going to stop someone just as fast as a .556 round from your AR-15.

I, personally won't use an ar or ak for home protection. I agree with you here. A shotty is best imho for home protection. You don't have to worry about overpenetration as much with a shotgun or .40 pistol. That is why I own both.

You don't NEED the AR-15 or AK, you WANT them. They are cool toys.

Dude, you don't NEED your shotgun either. So lets ban all guns like Great Britain and Australia and watch as the crime rates shoot up like gas prices. I use my rifles in the same way you do: SPORTING. But I and hundreds of thousands of others should be the red-headed step child because they are used in crime? They are no more used in crime than any other firearm. They just get media attention because most sheeple like drama. They are portrayed in the media as assault rifles because that was the agenda of the Clinton administration. So the Media picked up and ran with it as they knew they could get ratings by scaring people. As a byproduct of the hype, they have effectively driven a wedge between gun owners. Which was ok by them because it served their purpose then as it does now.

You like to play militia in your head and plan for your one man war with the governemnt (I'm betting on the government, I mean...look what they did to Iraq....TWICE!! ) when they come to take your weapons away. I understand. I just still don't see the NEED.

WOW! Now what, you are trying to insult me? If the government decided to start confiscating firearms from law-abiding citizens, it would mean they have strayed so far away from the Constitution that it might merit the thought to behave like Benjamin Franklin had. Remember, that is the same theory that Hitler had. Confiscate all firearms so they cannot retaliate.

I am also not diluded enough to think that criminals couldn't get them if they really wanted to, even if they were illegal for the general public to own. There are too many already in circulation for that. But if it made it harder for psychotic people who would kill innocent people, innocent police officers, they why would any logical person not want to at least try it.

They DID try it. Maybe you hadn't heard about the last ban...
"The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Act.[9] The report looked at 1.4 million guns involved in crime and determined that "since the law’s enactment ... assault weapons have made up only 1.61% of the guns ATF has traced to crime — a drop of 66% from the pre-ban rate" and that the Act prevented 60,000 assault weapon crimes over its 10-year period." Based on this statement a 66% drop would only correlate to slightly greater than 3% change in the rate of gun violence given a 1.61% rate of gun violence post-ban." So, basically, before the ban they were used in 3/100 crimes. After the ban, they were used in 1.61/100 crimes. These are the "common sense" gun laws that this administration would like to implement.


I have a very good friend who is a police officer and I hate to think of him falling to that same fate.

I, like most of us here, have a close friend who is an LEO(Cheif of Police). I got my first ak from him. He, and any officer, is more likely to be killed by a drunk driver than a gun. Heck DJTaso is now LEO. I respect him for that. It takes a lot to be willing to put yourself in that position. But it is there chosen profession. If it weren't dangerous, everybody would do it.

Guns don't kill people, people do. I absolutely agree, but it is harder for people to kill people who are wearing body armor if they aren't using a weapon that was created with the purpose of piercing body armor.

Could he not have used any other firearm to produce the same results?
An AK wasn't designed to pierce body armor. It can't always pierce a level II vest. That isn't much better than a pistol. Maybe you should see the size of the round. It is basically half to two thirds of a .308 round. It isn't more but less powerful than the average hunting round. It is similar in ballistics to a 30-30 round.

Again, just my $0.02. I know, I know, I am a radical leftist liberal who wants to take away your sweet precious guns. (read: Toys ) (Actually I'm not. I just don't see the freaking need for military style weapons to be in the hands of red necks and gang memebrs.)

I don't see you as a liberal at all. You are just an example of a fellow gun owner who has seen the media accounts twisting the truth(ie. lying) about semi-automatic rifles(and believing it), commonly reffered on the web as a fudd-type. "If the firearm doesn't fit my idea of what a hunting firearm should, then it should be outlawed." According to your two blunt classifications, you would be referring to me as a gang member. Well you are correct I am the member of a great gang called the NRA. Maybe you should do some real investigation before you pidgeonhole someone into a category that is shared with criminals. Although most rednecks hunt as well so maybe I belong there. IDK Why don't you decide.

Long live the United States Constitution.

[FroSSty]

And this is where I agree. The cons of semi-automatic guns outweigh the pros.

How so? You obviously have a problem with gun owners in general. If you don't believe in using guns then don't. But don't you dare try to tell me that I can't.

Screw the second amendment and quit hiding behind it.

Well then. I guess you answered my first observation. Without the second amendment, there is no constitution. So that is like saying screw the constitution. Thank you. You have provided yet another reason to fear the outcome of "more government" and answered a lot of questions many might have about you.

The British are not in our backyards anymore and we don't use muskets.

Nope. They have Automatics, Tanks, Bombers, Missiles, Satellites, and more and gobs of training and skill to use those weapons. I am sure America has what she needs to protect me against any foreign threat. But who will protect me against her when she realizes how powerful she is? That IS the point we are coming to isn't it? More .gov control and less liberties. Until what? Until there are no liberties and all .gov control? Thanks, but no thanks. Give me a break.

Hooray for freedom!

eta: I noticed you still haven't changed your original post. Disinfromation must not matter much to you. Thanks again.