Home > General Discussion > Armed march across Memorial Bridge… what could possibly go wrong?

Armed march across Memorial Bridge… what could possibly go wrong?
  • KalashniKEV May 9, 2013 - 9:09 am #72659 Reply

    Can you provide FACTUAL information to dispute any of this?  Nope, case closed.

    CO- Thank you for providing the facts, that… ummm… appear to disprove your argument.

    …any citizen deemed eligible to own a gun can own A gun in any state ?

    In the state of Virginia,  any 12 year old boy in the possession of a Hunter Safety Certificate can legally transport his firearm via bicycle to an area he wishes to hunt, load and make ready, and with the appropriate license, take game unaccompanied by an adult.

    Across the river in DC, can I ride around with an M4 type? Can Rick Perry bring his LaRue? Can Olympic Gold Medalist Keith Sanderson bring his pistol? NO.

    (Fun Fact: Can a Traffic Cop from New Jersey with a GED carry a weapon in DC? YES, under LEOSA ’04. Could Yassar Arafat carry his micro UZI? YES, under diplomatic and consular immunity )

    novasteve May 9, 2013 - 9:54 am #72663 Reply

    CO: Can you admit that it’s propaganda about the hype over “Assault weapons” given #1 they aren’t actually “assault rifles” and 2 , more people are killed with fists per year than with “assault weapons”? Do yout hink  banning a weapon by going through catalogues and picking the scariest looking ones is logical, or explain to me how a flash suppressor or a bayonet lug makes the firearm more dangerous, or that 223 is “large caliber” or a barrell shroud makes a rifle more dangerous?


    The entire democrat argument for gun control is based in complete ignorance about firearms and outright lies as well.

    Captain_Obvious May 9, 2013 - 9:58 am #72664 Reply

    How do they disprove my argument?  You can’t just say that and then provide…nothing.

    Chicago link:  No really, read the 4th paragraph…it says it there in plain English.

    NYC link:  This is NYPD’s FAQ website giving explicit details on how to go about getting a license, etc.

    DC link:  Halfway down the page there are sections called “Purchase” and “Possession“.

    Its so weird and amazing how this is in plain English.  This is all evidence that your 2nd amendment rights are not being violated in any state (DC included).  Don’t focus on specific types of firearms, some of which are banned in places across the US.

    The point is, you CAN own A gun.

    Kev, I know you are smart and can read, but stop saying you can’t own a gun in Chicago, NYC, or DC.

    Dezlboy May 9, 2013 - 10:00 am #72666 Reply

    NS wrote,”The entire democrat argument for gun control is based in complete ignorance about firearms and outright lies as well.”

    Entire? And no, don’t ask me to provide information, etc. No reason for anyone to reply to your strawmen and exaggerated statements.


    Captain_Obvious May 9, 2013 - 10:04 am #72667 Reply

    @NS, you ARE NOT changing the subject AGAIN.  I just provided you all the evidence you need, at least admit it now.

    I’m not gonna get into the debate about different types of guns, because honestly, I’ve only ever shot handguns and don’t know enough about rifles or “assault weapons’, etc.

    You gun people really need to stop saying the 2nd amendment is being violated…its just an outright lie (if you wanna talk about spreading lies…)

    novasteve May 9, 2013 - 10:05 am #72668 Reply

    Even the president of the UNITED STATES said the Sandy Hook shooter used an AUTOMATIC weapon.


    YOu have liberals like O’Malley saying that an AR-15 is a military weapon and that civilians shouldn’t have weapons that are used on the battlefield.

    it is NOT used on the battlefield. It is NOT a military weapon. It LOOKS like one. It is NOT fully automatic. It uses 223 round not 5.56 NATO.


    Are you going to sit there and deny that democrats have been doing this?


    The funniest part is that I have some ACTUAL military weapons that they don’t want to ban. My Mosin Nagant was probably used by soldiers during WW2. The Round go blow people’s heads off unlike a 223, and GULP, not only does it have a bayonet lug, it has a built in bayonet. And because it is bolt action it is more accurate than semi automatics and MUCH more powerful than an AR-15. But since it doesn’t look scary, it’s fine.



    KalashniKEV May 9, 2013 - 10:07 am #72670 Reply

    Kev, I know you are smart and can read, but stop saying you can't own a gun in Chicago, NYC, or DC.

    I live pretty close to Key Bridge- show me in that link how I could possibly move to the other side of the river and retain positive control of my NFA items and Title I stuff?

    Then show me how I could lawfully CCW without being involuntarily disarmed.

    You can’t own NFA items in DC. You can not CCW in DC.

    Residents of DC are bound by unconstitutional laws, which… look at that!!! Brings us right back on topic with the OP.

    Thank you for playing, and thank you for making my point.

    novasteve May 9, 2013 - 10:09 am #72672 Reply

    CO: You are simply going to ignore an aimportant argument because you admit your ignorance?


    Assault weapon is a term of art. The first assault rifle was the StG-44. It was groundbreaking because it combined the acuracy of a machine gun with the speed and size of a submachine. It was selective fire, meaning you can pick semi auto or fully automatic. And the round it uses is in between the size of a rifle caliber and a pistol caliber bullet.


    Now I suppose I’ll have to explain to you the difference between a machine gun and a submachine gun. A machine gun uses rifle caliber bullets, tend to be large. At that era, the smallest machine gun you had was probably a BAR. A submachine gun is a gun that is fully automatic that fires pistol caliber bullets.


    Calling something that isn’t an assault weapon an assault weapon is like calling a Camry a Maxima.  Yes, they are both cars, but they are not the same type. An AR-15 is NOTo a military weapon, nor is it an assault rifle. it just LOOKS like an M-16. Kind of like a 1987 for mustang 4 cyclinder looks like a 1987 Mustang GT, but they are NOT the same. Saying this is not relevant is very dishonest.

    Anonymous May 9, 2013 - 10:42 am #72673 Reply


    Residents of DC are bound by unconstitutional laws, which... look at that!!! Brings us right back on topic with the OP.

    It’s funny the party that would get riled up about gun laws in the district couldn’t care less about lack of representation, which is probably a more fundamental gap for DC residents.

    Captain_Obvious May 9, 2013 - 10:45 am #72674 Reply

    @N_S, I’m not going to debate with you different types of guns that are legal/illegal.  I did my job here, prove you wrong.

    It probably is silly to ban certain types of guns, in hopes it will solve any problems.  To me, there is plenty more that could/should be done before banning  a certain gun.

    Kev, sounds like if you want to move to DC, you’ll need to read up on the laws.  If you have guns that are not legal in DC, that’s your problem…you should get guns that are legal in DC.  As a responsible gun owner, its up to you to know the laws of surrounding jurisdictions and abide by them.  For example, MD and DC have hands-free laws regarding cell phones, VA does not.  So when I’m driving in MD and DC, I have to be aware of that.  I’m not trying to compare driving laws with guns, just pointing out how you need to know all the laws.

    Not having a CCW law in DC seems strange, but oh well, you can still own one in your home.

    So, residents of DC are bound by constitutional laws, which…look at that!!!  You can own a gun in DC !

    Thank you for playing, and sorry you choose to be ignorant.


    novasteve May 9, 2013 - 10:46 am #72675 Reply

    The constitution spells out that Washington, DC isn’t to be part of any state. That has implications for representation, not for the second amendment. Also, Kev made his choice to NOT LIVE in DC. Your argument saying that since DC can’t have representation that you can’t have guns, then someone could say “well, you can’t have abortion or gay marriage in DC since it’s not a state”

    novasteve May 9, 2013 - 10:47 am #72677 Reply

    CO: You saying you have proven you can own a gun in DC or Chicago is like me saying “sure you can have an abortion, just after a 9 month waiting period”

    Captain_Obvious May 9, 2013 - 11:04 am #72678 Reply

    I did prove it, why don’t you actually read the links I sent or just do your own research.

    get over it, you’re wrong and you’re telling lies.

    novasteve May 9, 2013 - 11:25 am #72679 Reply

    That’s like saying you can have any car you want, so long as it’s a Black Model T. Great, in DC I can have a handgun, only because of a supreme court case, but I can’t take it out of my home. That’s like saying, “sure, you can be openly gay here in washington, DC, so long as  you don’t express your sexual idenity outside of your home”.

    Captain_Obvious May 9, 2013 - 11:38 am #72681 Reply

    So you finally admit it !  We’ve made progress.

    last sentence makes no sense.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Subscribe to our mailing list