buckee Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 a bunch of you are so one sided. a bunch of you jump on the negatiuve bandwagon because one person says so. hello? we have the right to bear arms. but not for nothing you will never stop illegal arms getting into the hands of perps. Oh My God... How is this so much dangerous than any other firearm? Holy heck, its concealed in a flashlight and carrying case. Come on people, of course some of these would fall into the wrong hands. JUST LIKE ANY OTHER FIREARM THAT HAS BEEN PRODUCED. all of you need to calm down....again we have the right to bear arms and as long as we have our licenses and proper paperwork even then we will not stop illegal possesion of firearms. LOL ... I didn't jump on any wagon, just because someone else felt the same way I did. We have the right to pick our nose too, but does that mean we pick it, and pick it, until it bleeds profusely and our head caves in...LOL:rolleyes: . Oh My God... How is this so much dangerous than any other firearm? Holy heck, its concealed in a flashlight and carrying case. Come on people, of course some of these would fall into the wrong hands. JUST LIKE ANY OTHER FIREARM THAT HAS BEEN PRODUCED.How many other firearms come disguised as something other than a firearm? Who would be the biggest buyer of such a weapon and why? Do you think that such a weapon might encourage the black market sale of such a weapon? ..I do:rolleyes: The right to bear arms or pick your nose, comes with a little common sense responsibility. IMHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasDeerHunter Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I think they shouldn't be produced at all! They will cause nothing but big trouble for the shooting industry! That statement is a huge problem for me, it SHOULD NOT cause any problems for the shooting industry. It is our right to have firearms and once we start worrying about stuff like that affecting our right to bear arms then we become sympathetic to the anti-gun folks. We should all support the firearms industry and welcome things like this , it is a too lfor personal defense and there is no valid reason why it should cause any more issues than a newly designed deer rifle, shotgun, or handgun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasDeerHunter Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I can just see some gal out walking or jogging and someone tries to do something! With that thing the next thing you know, the thug will get it away from the women and now you have some real huge problems!:( No thank you! Ban them immediately! What's to stop that thug from getting any type of defense weapon from the women? Should women not carry mace, tazers, guns because they can be just as easily disarmed if the situation is right. I can not beleive that people on this forum are so quick to lay down and roll over for the anti-gunners. The huge problem is that there are bad people in this world and we will not change that fact ever, if those bad people choose to use firearms for the wrong reason then that is a choice they make. Banning any type of firearm WILL NOT keep them out of the hands of bad guys. More violent deaths in America are from blunt objects, should we ban baseball bats then. We don't want some kid going to practice and a thug getting his hands on that bat. What about 2x4's, I better stop building homes for a living because I don't want any thugs steeling my lumber to commit crimes. Im sorry if I am coming off like a jack*** , but I am tired of hunters, sportsmen, shooters all standing by and letting our rights be trampled on and us not stick together. I agree that there should be a level of responsibility in exercising our second ammendment rights, but creating a tool for personal defense in my eyes does not sidestep that responsibilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasDeerHunter Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 LOL ... I didn't jump on any wagon, just because someone else felt the same way I did. We have the right to pick our nose too, but does that mean we pick it, and pick it, until it bleeds profusely and our head caves in...LOL:rolleyes: How many other firearms come disguised as something other than a firearm? Who would be the biggest buyer of such a weapon and why? Do you think that such a weapon might encourage the black market sale of such a weapon? ..I do:rolleyes: The right to bear arms or pick your nose, comes with a little common sense responsibility. IMHO There are few other firearms that come disguised, but of the ones I know there has not been a outbreak of crimes commited with them. ( ie. Freedom Arms belt buckle gun, wallet gun, and the folding handle gun that resembles a clip knife ) The biggest buyer IMO would be shooters who like gadgets. Just about any firearm generates black market sales. How bout we actually punish those who committ the crimes and try to deter crime with zero tolerance, How bout we educate our youth about firearms get them involved in the outdoors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adjam5 Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 Every GUN has the potential to be a "cop killer". Every bullet has the potential to be a "cop killer Bullet" in the WRONG hands. Its not the gun its the person. I thought unlicensed concealed was already against the law? What about all those guns that hide in a belt buckle? The Freedom Arms derringers. In wallet hosters for the Beretta .22's, .25's and .32's? Pen guns? Cane guns? Those are already in existence and regulated. Yes, wallet holsters are regulated in NYS. I see how this would cause concern among LE, but BAD people are the problem, not the equipment they use to commit crimes. Guns in the hands of felons are already illegal. As gun owners in a Free society, a honest law abiding citizen should be able to own WHATEVER they want in The Good Ole US of A. A subject cannot, a citizen can. This is GUN CONTROL talk coming from you guys... I can't believe it! I know I know...Its for our own good ...right? PUHLEEESE...Go vote for Clinton crime family too why don't cha? This should not pose anymore of a threat than ANY other firearm in the WRONG hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I knew this was heading here and I usually try to avoid these posts but, I need to agree with the last couple here. Not a chance I'd ever say not to make a particular gun unless it was unsafe for the shooter him/her self. I myself would not have a use for one but, some people like these kinds of gadgets/guns. Who am I too say they shouldn't have them? Just my $ .02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetucker Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 exactly!! a bunch of you are so one sided. a bunch of you jump on the negatiuve bandwagon because one person says so. hello? we have the right to bear arms. but not for nothing you will never stop illegal arms getting into the hands of perps. Oh My God... How is this so much dangerous than any other firearm? Holy heck, its concealed in a flashlight and carrying case. Come on people, of course some of these would fall into the wrong hands. JUST LIKE ANY OTHER FIREARM THAT HAS BEEN PRODUCED. all of you need to calm down....again we have the right to bear arms and as long as we have our licenses and proper paperwork even then we will not stop illegal possesion of firearms. just what i was thinking.How is that thing anymore dangerous than the .45,9mm,380,25,some of those things can be hidden pretty darn good.just cuz it folds up.And shawns right other pistols,rifles,shotguns,ect... can get in the wrong hands.You might as well join hillary if you say ban this cuz it is our ammended right to bear arms."just one more thing for people for gun control to complain about"well they complain anyway so what is another thing for them to whine about. I personally would think(being a gun lover and shootin enthusiast)it would be fun to take to the gravel pit and put a box of shells through or two.Oh and ya i would buy one for my wife while she goes for her nightly walk with dog.Last yr a scum bag drove buy and thank god there was someone scoutin for deer and was in the woods unseen and that scum tried to attack my wife.she would have needed some protection if that hunter wasn't there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I'm far, far from being an Anti-Gun person, for all who know me, "BUT", If guns like that are produced that serve no purpose other than to be disguised and then can be used as full auto, or even semi auto,to "git down to business", that it, in itself is ammo for the antis, not a positive statement for gun owners. If good law abiding, supposedly reasonable, rational, common sense, minded adults, sit here and say that this weapons benefits, far outweigh the bad, then in my opinion, we ain't thinking rational or look rational to the general public at all. If we, as gun owners, are so afraid of the antis, that we don't dare police our own ranks within the NRA, with a common sense approach to "the Right to Keep and bear arms", then we just give the antis more fuel for the fire. When good so called law abiding citizens say, listen folks "we really don't need weapons like that produced", it makes us look like a rational bunch, instead of an off-the-wall gun toting rednecks. Why would a manufacturer make a gun that they claim they have no intention of mass producing, knowing full well, that it will put the antis up in arms and create controversy? Why ... Because they are hoping that someone will want it produced. (it's all about the money, not responsibility ) I don't get it... "Common sense". It seems we(us gun owners) are willing to throw Common sense out the window for chaos disguised as freedom. Hey, I'm against most forms of gun control(accept for the few common sense rules, like background checks, ID, etc), but that doesn't mean, I'd vote for a gun such as this on the open market. I might be just a dumb redneck, but I can see the forest in spite of the trees in the way. Hey, I ain't going to change anyones mind, I'm just posting my opinion on this silly, and yet innovative new weapon:rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VermontHunter Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I'm far, far from being an Anti-Gun person, for all who know me, "BUT", If guns like that are produced that serve no purpose other than to be disguised and then can be used as full auto, or even semi auto,to "git down to business", that it, in itself is ammo for the antis, not a positive statement for gun owners. If good law abiding, supposedly reasonable, rational, common sense, minded adults, sit here and say that this weapons benefits, far outweigh the bad, then in my opinion, we ain't thinking rational or look rational to the general public at all. If we, as gun owners, are so afraid of the antis, that we don't dare police our own ranks within the NRA, with a common sense approach to "the Right to Keep and bear arms", then we just give the antis more fuel for the fire. When good so called law abiding citizens say, listen folks "we really don't need weapons like that produced", it makes us look like a rational bunch, instead of an off-the-wall gun toting rednecks. Why would a manufacturer make a gun that they claim they have no intention of mass producing, knowing full well, that it will put the antis up in arms and create controversy? Why ... Because they are hoping that someone will want it produced. (it's all about the money, not responsibility ) I don't get it... "Common sense". It seems we(us gun owners) are willing to throw Common sense out the window for chaos disguised as freedom. Hey, I'm against most forms of gun control(accept for the few common sense rules, like background checks, ID, etc), but that doesn't mean, I'd vote for a gun such as this on the open market. I might be just a dumb redneck, but I can see the forest in spite of the trees in the way. Hey, I ain't going to change anyones mind, I'm just posting my opinion on this silly, and yet innovative new weapon:rolleyes: Well said, and I agree 100% ... I agree with the right to posses and bear arms, but where is the line when the weapon of choice becomes non-sense .. ?? .. This one just seems to be more of a campus / mall killer to me .. JMHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 Well said, and I agree 100% ... I agree with the right to posses and bear arms, but where is the line when the weapon of choice becomes non-sense .. ?? .. This one just seems to be more of a campus / mall killer to me .. JMHO i have to disagree with calling the gun a campus/mall killer. it is the operator of the weapon that is the killer not the weapon. guns don't kill people. people kill people. unfortunately in this day in age you have to be all for gun ownership or all for gun control. there can not be any this gun is ok but this one isn't. its said but i believe its true. if the anti's get an inch you better believe they will have the whole mile by the time they are done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swamphunter Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 My last comment on this is only that when the Constitution was written by our forefathers, I doubt, they had any idea what weapons of the future would become. Let alone, semi and fully automatic guns that are disguised like flashlights used to "git down ta bidness" with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camoman1 Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 Pretty neat gun. I can see both sides of the fence on the issue of whether it should be produced or not...... but guns dont kill people..people do. I also understand the 'guy in the alley' scenario above....but i think a guy who is willing to kill a police officer (or anybody else for that matter) is goin to do it no matter what kind of gun he has, not because he is carrying THAT particular weapon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant-KS Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 Alright, before we get too carried away here...oops, too late. Say it was produced in the configuration illustrated in the video. This weapon is a full auto SBR(Short Barreled Rifle). In order to legally own this weapon, and only if your state allows it, you would need alot of NFA paperwork. You would need a class III firearms license because it's a machine gun, and you would need the paperwork for the SBR. Also, this weapon with an autosear couldn't be sold to civilians unless the sear was manufactured before 1986. If this thing was a semi-auto only, and did not have the stock, you've got a Glock 9MM with a big hunk of frame and poo on it. I would love to own one of these things just for kicks and giggles, but there's no way I'd pay the money for all the paperwork, etc. to get one when you could get a much nicer MG anyway. This gun would be a fun range toy for people with more money than they know what to do with, and honestly as a new production weapon under the current strict gun laws, wouldn't have too much of a chance of getting into the wrong hands any more than the hundreds of NFA weapons already legally owned by U.S. citizens. With that said, let's just all take a relaxative and have fun. This thing isn't going anywhere anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adjam5 Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 My last comment on this is only that when the Constitution was written by our forefathers, I doubt, they had any idea what weapons of the future would become. Let alone, semi and fully automatic guns that are disguised like flashlights used to "git down ta bidness" with. So I guess they did not mean the internet was protected either under the 1st amendment; freedom of speech, because they could not imagine such a thing at the time. Right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Posted March 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I'm far, far from being an Anti-Gun person, for all who know me, "BUT", If guns like that are produced that serve no purpose other than to be disguised and then can be used as full auto, or even semi auto,to "git down to business", that it, in itself is ammo for the antis, not a positive statement for gun owners. If good law abiding, supposedly reasonable, rational, common sense, minded adults, sit here and say that this weapons benefits, far outweigh the bad, then in my opinion, we ain't thinking rational or look rational to the general public at all. If we, as gun owners, are so afraid of the antis, that we don't dare police our own ranks within the NRA, with a common sense approach to "the Right to Keep and bear arms", then we just give the antis more fuel for the fire. When good so called law abiding citizens say, listen folks "we really don't need weapons like that produced", it makes us look like a rational bunch, instead of an off-the-wall gun toting rednecks. Why would a manufacturer make a gun that they claim they have no intention of mass producing, knowing full well, that it will put the antis up in arms and create controversy? Why ... Because they are hoping that someone will want it produced. (it's all about the money, not responsibility ) I don't get it... "Common sense". It seems we(us gun owners) are willing to throw Common sense out the window for chaos disguised as freedom. Hey, I'm against most forms of gun control(accept for the few common sense rules, like background checks, ID, etc), but that doesn't mean, I'd vote for a gun such as this on the open market. I might be just a dumb redneck, but I can see the forest in spite of the trees in the way. Hey, I ain't going to change anyones mind, I'm just posting my opinion on this silly, and yet innovative new weapon:rolleyes: not for nothing steve but talking about giving anti's fuel for the fire. when they see a person like you, who is stated himself as being far far from a anti and putting down something like this that just gives them that much more fuel. We all know they look at thise site and forums. "well an avid gun owner even denounced this weapon himself". thats not adding to the fire? we all live in different area of this country and different situations. a concealed weapon like this might not appeal to you steve or to many others of you for that. but for where some people live, a weapon like that might be a nice addition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I wonder what Jim Zumbo's thoughts on this gun are? :D:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I wonder what Jim Zumbo's thoughts on this gun are? :D:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasDeerHunter Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I wonder what Jim Zumbo's thoughts on this gun are? :D:D Yeah, I think after his incident he has become more educated on the issue. I personally think that a law abiding person has the right to own any type of firearm, fully auto or other. Maybee not go out and purchase 100 fully auto's , but one or two for plinking or collecting, what would be the harm. How many shootings in this nation are commited with weapons that are full auto? I recall only one or two . How many school shootings or murders were stopped by background checks or waiting periods? Probably not too many if any. Most criminals will use whatever and personally I think they would choose to go get a handgun and conceal it in their pocket rather than a high tech flashlight/gun. I am shocked that there are people on this forum that just don't get it. School shootings have nothing to do with this issue, it has more to do with the loss of family time and positive education on guns. I was high school not too many years ago, and just about every guy had a truck with a gun rack and a gun in it at school. We never had a hint of a school shooting, most of us were hunters and shooters and our parents and family taught us right from wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 How many school shootings or murders were stopped by background checks or waiting periods? Probably not too many if any.I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here. How can guns even be sold to law abiding, and "of age" citizens without a background check or ID check ? Do you honestly think nothing has been accomplished by this law?...WOW it has more to do with the loss of family time and positive education on guns. I was high school not too many years ago, and just about every guy had a truck with a gun rack and a gun in it at school. We never had a hint of a school shooting, most of us were hunters and shooters and our parents and family taught us right from wrong.Same when I went to school, but that was back in the days when Mom stayed at home, and didn't "HAVE" to go to work. We do live in troubled times when it comes to Family values, and everything else. It's a snowball rolling down the hill. I couldn't agree more with your statement, but there is the reality of living in the Today and Now, that we also have to deal with. We can't live in Yesterdays....I wish Remember...Freedom without sound rules, is nothing more that Chaos:rolleyes: This new weapon, is nothing more than a novelty concealed weapon, designed specifically, to be concealed. Why would a law abiding citizen need something like this, other that a novelty? Are we so afraid of the Antis, that we are willing to sacrifice each other, in the name of protecting or so-called freedoms. If we as gun owners, aren't willing to be a part of the law making process, to protect or rights, there are others who are more than willing to step in and make the rules for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Maybe I ought to lock this thread. Oh yeah, i can't!! :D:D:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebeilgard Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I wonder what Jim Zumbo's thoughts on this gun are? :D:D we couldn't even beat the thoughts on this gun out of jim... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Are we so afraid of the Antis, that we are willing to sacrifice each other, in the name of protecting or so-called freedoms. If we as gun owners, aren't willing to be a part of the law making process, to protect or rights, there are others who are more than willing to step in and make the rules for us. no steve we are not sacrificing each other. Us law abiding citizens are the one who keep the right firm. WE ARE NOT THE ONES WHO SAY WE SHOULD BE STRIPPED OF OUR FIREARMS. Like some people would like to see. we are the ones who in responsible hands keep the right going. You sound like you dont have faith in those who are responsible. im sorry sir but i am responsible with every firearm i own. nothing will every change that. but for you to sit here as a "supposed gun enthusiast" and talk negatively about a certain gun or any gun right to me is just hyprocritical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I understand where you're coming from Shaun. I'm not being hypocritical at all. I believe in common sense, and my common sense tells me there is no legitimate use for this hide-away weapon, other than to hide it away. We need it, like we need a hole in the head. But hey, that's just my personal opinion. Please don't misinterpret what I'm saying. I'm not saying that I would condemn any responsible gun owners for owning one of these cool little trinkets to plunk away at the range. I'm looking beyond that. And, I am very aware than guns don't kill people,... people kill people. But why would we as responsible, law abiding gun owners, want to stand behind, and endorse a product, that is going to make the criminals in our society, rub their hands together, and say "I gotta get me one of those" Hey, I've spouted off my opinion on this little trinket, gadget, of a gun. I'm done now and I still love all of my brothers and sisters at arms. The question is....do you still love me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 steve how could we not......lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VermontHunter Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 i have to disagree with calling the gun a campus/mall killer. it is the operator of the weapon that is the killer not the weapon. guns don't kill people. people kill people. unfortunately in this day in age you have to be all for gun ownership or all for gun control. there can not be any this gun is ok but this one isn't. its said but i believe its true. if the anti's get an inch you better believe they will have the whole mile by the time they are done I agree with you on this Mike and I think you would find it hard to find any sane person that wouldn't..... But why make it easier for such said person /s with a weapon of this type ?? And the reason I used the term campus / mall killer is because weapons of this type seems to be the weapon /s of choice for this type of insanity. When was the last time you heard of someone using a bolt action weapon for a massacre at a campus or mall ?? ,,, Like I stated tho ,, this is just MHO on this topic, with more of these types of slaughters occurring this day and age something has to be done ... you can't keep using the term LAW BIDING CITIZEN, because these aren't the people causing the issue ,, it's the mentally insane and criminals so how do you intend to stop them ?? I hate to see weapons classified myself, but like I said earlier where do we draw the line on practical weapons for civilian use and possession ?? .... :confused: To me this topic is more political than moral ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.