The Maryland sniper

[|MP|Buccaneer]

The worst of it is that the oxymoron reference was the only part of his post that actually made sense.

And Zaitsev, if you want guns to be illegal, why not move some place that they are illegal?  Leave America for those that believe in the constitution.

[EUR_Zaitsev]

wow Bucc that was amazingly.....selfish and ignorent are the words im looking for!

[Deadeye]

no zaitsev, ignorant is someone that doesn't actually go and try to learn more on the subject.  you have been ignorantly following some numbers that don't have anything to do with the effects of gun control, all to further your argument.

you have never considered the consiquences of what gun bans would do, even though buccaneer asked multiple times.  

so, what's so ignorant about asking you why you don't leave if guns are so bad to you?  why is that an invalid question?

you say that "gun control needs to be stepped up before you have these types of results from legal guns".  so, are you saying that those university studies that show less violent crimes in the areas with more legal guns, and more liberal gun laws are all wrong?  those results are a fact.  it happens.  just like the fact that violence didn't go down when other countries went to ultra strict laws or bans.  you stand by numbers that are meaningless in this context and ignore others that are put before you.  how is that not ignorant and selfish?

[KoS PY.nq.ict]

Here's a few things about the military getting involved in the sniper search:

1.) It's unconstitutional. (meaning against the law for those who's brain cell is on the fritz)

2.) The FBI, ATF, and Secret Service all have snipers and specialists who could search for this guy. It would be most logical for the Secret Service to be involved since some of the shootings occurred in the Washington area.
(no the FBI, ATF, and Secret Service are not considered military)

3.) The police in conjuction with the agencies listed above (not to mention Homeland Security...where the hell are they?) are fully capable of finding this bastard.

4.) I say again. Unconstitutional. ILLEGAL ILLEGAL ILLEGAL.
Even for a freaking spy plane.

Please stop the crap about the military getting involved. THEY CAN'T AND WON'T. I listened to a talk radio show this afternoon and they described a poll taken by a local Washington news agency. Nearly half the people who voted said they wanted military involvement. CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS? 48% of the people didn't give a damn if a military tank was parked in their driveway. Americans are such dupes when it comes to the Constitution and their rights. And for fucks sake...the military not getting involved with civilian police (and militia) is a very important part!!!

On gun control....We as Americans have the right to bear arms. This was set so we could have a way of defending ourselves from corrupt invaders and even our own government. I do believe that background checks and user identification weapons are a good choice. But completely taking our gun rights away is bullshit. Liberals like to blame our societal problems on "holes" in the Constitution but half the time its the liberal law makers who are making it easier for criminals to commit crimes. Our judicial system is a sham. Someone can go kill a family of 7 in cold blood and be out on peroll within 10 years minimum. Whoever kills an innocent person should be killed in return. PERIOD. The killer has no rights once he's violated someone elses...not to mention hurting the families of the victims.

BAH TO THIS DAMN SNIPER....AND BAH TO PEOPLE WHO WANT TO CHANGE OUR RIGHTS....

[Bondo]

3.)(not to mention Homeland Security...where the hell are they?)

They are in Colorado Springs and are quite chilly as winter is descending for the first time here.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Pyict, it isn't technically illegal for the military to get involved.  They would have to be requisted by the Governers of the states involved, except for DC, since it's not a State.

Also, the Secret Service can't get involved much.  It's not in their charter either.  They belong to the Treasury Department.  It was more a fluke that they guard the President (not really a fluke, but a very interesting story).

The FBI is the lead organization.  The ATF doesn't really belong, but they squeek in do to the fact that it is gun related.  But they are more about regulation and smuggling (think DEA, but for ATF).

The States could call in the National Guard anytime they want, this is within the power of the Governers.

Oh, and the Office of Homeland Security is just a post now, not an agency with officers, unless I missed something.  They are there for policy, not enforcement.

I also don't want tanks in the streets, don't get me wrong.  Just correcting some of the finer points.  

If the FBI wants to bring in some military help, I'm all for it.  It's their show, let them get help wherever they want it.  But these polls are just armchair quarterbacking.  What the hell good is a spy plane, drone, whatever, when you have no idea where he is going to strike next.

This criminal hasn't formed a pattern yet.  That's why it's so hard to do anything about it.  Random crimes are supposedly the hardest to investigate.  This guy is just finding a good spot, being careful to not leave evidence, and taking whatever shot of oppertunity seems to present itself.  He hasn't stayed in one area, hasn't kept a schedule.  It's scarry what a half intelligent nutball can do.  

I think the only way this case will really break is by luck.  Someone will eventually see him, with a package that looks like a rifle.  Maybe get a traffic ticket or something in more then one place.  But there isn't much for the cops to use right now.  Glad he has 1000 mile before he gets this way.

[KoS PY.nq.ict]

Yes that's right bucc. The governor can call in National Gaurd but im mostly talking about the main military. Army, Navy, Air Force, etc. Including spy planes. I was also stressing the cooperation between these agencies. With their resources pulled together, they can put an end to this asshole.

hey should be on his high horse because hes right. bondo remember the constitution??

Sk,
Take some time to read the 2nd amendment.
"A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
We have the right to form militias, back in the late 1700s militias helped the regular armed forces in the country in case of invasion, like the revolutionary war and such.
Now that its more than 200 years after that was written, would another country march into the US on horseback and take over? FUCK NO, any other country would send a couple nukes over and regulate on us.
So what the NRA wants is the ability to keep murder rates high (acidental deaths included), unsafe streets, and all to get drunk and shoot deer, oh and form a militia (something that will never be needed again).
Anyone who "suports" guns is also suporting the acidental death of children.

The same idiots who suport the NRA are also the people who believe that God made the world in 7 days and have the rebel flag plastered on their truck.

Sorry for this double post but i just caught jeb's post and had to comment.


Jeb...how would you defend yourself if a group of rogue military or some government agency came to your door, rounding up your family and sending them off to some unbeknownst place. It happens everyday in China. What's to  say it won't happen here.

And about people invading on horses. Yes you're right. Unless they were mentally retarded and on all known drugs, no one would invade us on horses. But....There are a crapload of countries that hate us...and who have far worse weapons than horses. The amendment gives us the right to defend ourself against an attack.

What if we are invaded by several countries and our defenses are spread thin. What's to stop the invaders from marching up to your doorstop and killing your family?  OH wait...you supported the banning of all weapons to civilians because so many children die from guns. Well you get to cry too when your family gets screwed by an invader into your home. What are you going to defend with then? Your fists? A bat? Maybe your penis? Oh maybe the invader will become nice, grow wings and a halo, and lay down his weapon. Maybe he'll cook you up a nice dinner and lay you to bed and all is forgiven. Or maybe he'll rape the women of your family and murder all of you in cold blood. Then steal all your valuable possessions which he'll pawn off and buy beer with. Oh I see. Lets lay down our defenses and all become really good pals. Then no one will need to commit crimes or murders.

You scream gun control. But what's to stop someone from using a knife? A pipe? A car?...Let's ban all those too. Let's put an end to drunk driving by banning cars. Let's cut our vegetables with our fingers because all our knives were confiscated. Oh hell why don't we all just sit in individual metal boxes for the rest of our lives and see what happens to the crime rate then.

[EUR_Zaitsev]

LOL Bondo I think that was a damn good post up there

Okay so as not to infringe on your rights we will make every bullet cost 1000 dollars and guns 10 times that.

[|MP|Cringe]

You scream gun control. But what's to stop someone from using a knife? A pipe? A car?...Let's ban all those too

Py, gun control IS a good idea, i mean ytf does anyone need a rifle or semiautomatic weap in any city that has an established police force. Or is it just those of you who need an object that can kill from a distance in their hands to feel like a man........

[Brain]

just an update on the original thread topic (keep going on gun controll all you want. as long as it doesnt become a flame war, i dont care)

a man and his step son were aprehended early this morning, and are being questioned.

this info is a few hours old, so i dont know how accurate it is

just thought that you may want to know

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Okay so as not to infringe on your rights we will make every bullet cost 1000 dollars and guns 10 times that.

So do me a favor and look up the word "infringe".  You'd find that raising the costs to those would qualify.  And you wonder why I get frustrated and call you a dumbass.

dude they arested 2 guys with sniperes it might be them!!

yay stupid middeleastern guy with a 17 year old son

Silent, he was an AMERICAN SOILDER (a mechanic) in Desert Storm.  I think that makes him an AMERICAN, not a "stupid middeleastern" guy.

If this was him, notice he was not spec force, and never had sniper training in the military (taken from the news this morning).  He was a mechanic.  He's also black (african american if you like) so I don't think you sould tie this to the Middle East.

Py, gun control IS a good idea, i mean ytf does anyone need a rifle or semiautomatic weap in any city that has an established police force. Or is it just those of you who need an object that can kill from a distance in their hands to feel like a man........

Cringe, maybe you should go back and read some of those studies, that showed how much more safe you were with those weapons (look to previous posts).  Violent crime has been shown to go down in areas with more liberal gun laws (meaning that more people carry them around legally).  So, YTF shouldn't we?  Guns are the great equalizer.  They keep big guys from me (except with evil intent) from bending little guys like you over and raping you.  With guns, size and strength don't matter.  A woman can fight off a rapist or murder, because she is just as deadly as he is.  That scares the criminals more then it does the liberals (as seen by the crime statictics.)

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

The guy might have been a mechanic, Bucc, but he had expert status (Hitting 36 of 40 targets at ranges between 50-300m timed) with an M-16A2 rifle (no scope). They found a BUshmaster .223 rifle with a scope and a tripod meaning that you truly don't need to have a sniper's touch, just a good shooters hand (which this guy obviously had to hit the expert status).

They aren't sure if this is the guy, but I sure as hell hope that he is and the terror in D.C. will be over.

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

For clarification, a Bushmaster .223 is built like a M-16 or CAR military rifle - so he obviously had experience and definitely had the touch for this type of gun. You can probably find a picture of one if you look on the internet somewhere.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Assassin, my point was directed at those that were specuating that this guy was specail forces trained.  Not that he didn't know how to shoot.

Anyone looking for what that gun is, it's also known as a "varment gun".  It's basicaly a legal version of a sniper rifle (just smaller caliber) used to shoot pests (varments) at long distance.  It's your basic .22 except the barrel is as thick as a shotgun (to improve accuracy).  I've used one to take care of a goper problem we were having once at the farm.  Not this model, ours didn't look that military.

One picture can be found here.

It's not that common of a gun, which is a good sign that this may be the right guy.

[EUR_Zaitsev]

Wow completly legal weaponry to the very scope, man Im sure glad we didnt infringe on anyones rights though! I mean heck all hunters NEED autmatic rifles with sniperscopes I mean DUH right. Fine we wont infringe on rights lets just tax bullets to hell.

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

Wow completly legal weaponry to the very scope, man Im sure glad we didnt infringe on anyones rights though! I mean heck all hunters NEED autmatic rifles with sniperscopes I mean DUH right. Fine we wont infringe on rights lets just tax bullets to hell.

Way to read Zaitsev. It is a semi-automatic rifle, not an automatic rifle. For those of you who don't know the difference, a semi-auto allows you to fire in rapid succession without having to reload, pump, or cock the hammer of the gun. Most pistols are semi-auto except for revolvers of course.

Also Zaitsev, it doesn't matter even if it was an auto rifle because he could have done the same thing with a bigger and more powerful hunting rifle.

[Colin]

Bucc, guns provide the MEANS to kill and do great harm.  This is what some people (bondo and Zaitsev) have been trying to say!  By buying a gun, u have created the means for a possible murder or suicide.  Another point which has been covered is that banning guns, or making them a lot more difficult to obtain will also make illegal guns a lot more difficult to obtain.  In using a knife or a crowbar, u need to be very close and also need to have a lot more willpower (trust me, its true) do kill someone with it.  It's so much easier (mentally) to aim a gun and shoot people from far away than to go up to someone and stab them or beat them with a bat.  Gun r just so much easier for killers.  Must a horrible event such as even one more unnecessary killing have to take place?  Would something like that HAVE to be repeated?

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

Bucc, the rifles I was thinking about were more similar to these, also made by Bushmaster, and more likely to be the rifle the sniper used.

http://www.hdarms.us/page7.html#xm15

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Assassin,

Could be, but I didn't see the bipod option on that one.  It was on the previous one (varment gun).

Colin,

Bucc, guns provide the MEANS to kill and do great harm.  This is what some people (bondo and Zaitsev) have been trying to say!  By buying a gun, u have created the means for a possible murder or suicide.  

Yes Colin, MEANS.  Guns are a tool, I've been saying that.  Getting rid of that tool doesn't change people, just the tools they use.

Another point which has been covered is that banning guns, or making them a lot more difficult to obtain will also make illegal guns a lot more difficult to obtain.  

No, it hasn't been covered.  I argue that they will not be much more difficult to obtain.  Nobody has touched that one with me yet.  If every type of drug can be smuggled into and sold all over this country, why would guns be any different?  There isn't a huge market for it yet, but a gun ban would create that market.  The US government hasn't proven itself very good in keeping illegal things out of the country, why would guns be any different?

n using a knife or a crowbar, u need to be very close and also need to have a lot more willpower (trust me, its true) do kill someone with it.  It's so much easier (mentally) to aim a gun and shoot people from far away than to go up to someone and stab them or beat them with a bat.  

Trust you?  Why, have you done it?  Have you killed with both a gun and something else like a knife or baseball bat?  Remember that 1/3 of all the homicides in this country are NOT comitted with a gun.  So there are still plenty of people that find other means.

Must a horrible event such as even one more unnecessary killing have to take place?  Would something like that HAVE to be repeated?

You see Colin, I blame the killer.  Not the gun.  There hasn't been any evidence shown that a gun ban would reduce violence in America.  I've looked, I've asked.  Nothing.  Just opinions that it would.  Gun bans in other countries have resulted in violent crimes going up, not down.  Studies in America show that places with the more "liberal" gun laws (ccw's and such) have less violent crime.  Bondo's own graphs show that many countries with strict gun control have more deaths (he just doesn't count them).  Go after the criminals, not the tools, which don't have to be used for crimes.

[Colin]

btw, i heard that the sniper demanded a ransom of 10 million bucks before he was "caught"

here is a speculation:  The U.S. realized that catching the sniper would be impossible and secretly gave the 10 million ransom to the sniper while planting one of their own guys as the "caught sniper".  Now the sniper will stop and the American people have their criminal...

Just a thought...

  :DColin----Cuo
*Retired*