Is Alex Jones "Crazy"?

Calling someone crazy because they have a different viewpoint than me is weak minded and immature.

No. He's a troll. He doesn't believe in half the **** he spews, but he knows there's money to be made in the spewing of it. Very similar to Glen Beck, though I think Beck actually probably did believe Romney was going to fulfill the White Horse Prophecy.

I'm a conservative who likes to listen to Alex Jones for a good laugh every once in a while.

BmanMcfly said:

Not quite, the government desires disarmed populations. So, whenever something happens that can be used it gets hyped in the media in an attempt to sell people on the idea of disarmament.

Then people buy into the lies after the trauma and while fearful for themselves and their families.


Because they have been sold (and bought into) the lie that they should be defenseless for their safety.

Click to expand...

Still more paranoia.

BmanMcfly said:

Yes, and car accidents have a deleterious effect on many peoples lives, but there's no talk about banning cars.

People must realize that a gun is a tool that can be used for good or bad, just like a hammer can build a house or smash a skull. It's about the people wielding the tool, and since Theres a large mass of people on psychotropic drugs who might get their hands on a gun and try to shoot people, it's that much more important to be able to defend yourself and to increase the odds for yourself and any other potential victims.

Click to expand...

Most people aren't going to look at guns like hammers because more people use and own hammers than use and own guns. As for your last sentence, it's stuff like that that gets in the way of serious discussion. Trying to paint the streets of America back into the (romanticized) Old West colors will not work. People want security and most of them don't believe they will find it with armed citizens acting like vigilantes.

BmanMcfly said:

Hell, why not ban spoons because that's made millions of people fat and obesity has a "deleterious effect" on many peoples lives.

Click to expand...

We tried that once for a different reason (I Can't Drive 55!) and it did reduce highway deaths. Then business decided it cost too much money so it was repealed. However, the government does up the ante every so often requiring car companies to incorporate new safety devices into new models.

BmanMcfly said:

But, nobody wants to discuss this issue as an issue of mental health and morality rather than an issue of guns...

Click to expand...

I agree, they don't, and part of the problem is the NRA et al refuses to address the concerns of the other side. You can't force your views on the majority. Far better to concentrate on the causes of gun violence and address those issues than to use the vigilante or extremist arguments (government plot - Really? :roll: ). Those will get you no where with the general population and, in fact, often exacerbate the problem.

MoSurveyor said:

Still more paranoia.

Click to expand...

Oh, that's ok, you're of the belief that government is pushing for gun control for only benevolent reasons.

Most people aren't going to look at guns like hammers because more people use and own hammers than use and own guns.

Click to expand...

And since hammers kill people yearly more than guns do, sounds like I should be more concerned about a person walking the streets with a hammer than a gun.

As for your last sentence, it's stuff like that that gets in the way of serious discussion. Trying to paint the streets of America back into the (romanticized) Old West colors will not work. People want security and most of them don't believe they will find it with armed citizens acting like vigilantes.

Click to expand...

Ya, prisons are secure... People don't want THAT MUCH security, yet that's what it would take to get guns out.

It's not about acting like a vigilante, it's about protecting yourself against predators.

We tried that once for a different reason (I Can't Drive 55!) and it did reduce highway deaths. Then business decided it cost too much money so it was repealed. However, the government does up the ante every so often requiring car companies to incorporate new safety devices into new models.

Click to expand...

Right, but we don't look at "problem cars" and try to ban specific cars, even if they are involved in more deaths than other models (even though the analogy doesn't work in that the weapons that are targeted are involved in the FEWEST CRIMES).

I agree, they don't, and part of the problem is the NRA et al refuses to address the concerns of the other side.

Click to expand...

Ya, because the NRA doesn't want to end up like the smokers... Remember, first it was "hey, be nice and take your smoke to the smoking section over there, then they walked off the smoking section to appease the other side, then the non-smokers told te smokers to take it outside, now it's take it down the street...

The NRA, as milk-toast as they are, are not willing to compromise, because once they give an inch the morons will try to take a mile.

You can't force your views on the majority. Far better to concentrate on the causes of gun violence and address those issues than to use the vigilante or extremist arguments (government plot - Really? :roll: ). Those will get you no where with the general population and, in fact, often exacerbate the problem.

Click to expand...

You cant take the rights of the minority, actually that's why the rights are listed... Free speech is not to protect popular speech, but to protect what is unpopular,

Stop calling it "gun" violence... It's just violence and people killing people, no different from when Cain killed Abel.

But you wan to look at root causes, look to culture, look to the extent to which the population is medicated from ssri's which have on the label that a "side-effects" include suicide and psychotic episodes...

You can't escape the fact that the last 3 examples in te past century of disarmament led directly to a situation that cost the lives of approximately 200 million people (that's not counting the wars tha occurred simultaneously).

So, ya, if you explain to people that guns are important for more than just shooting, and history ha PROVEN that clearing out the guns from a society, at least more often then not, precedes a culling of the population.

I'm still waiting for the "well, there are too many people" argument that the leftists hold close to their hearts.

BmanMcfly said:

Oh, that's ok, you're of the belief that government is pushing for gun control for only benevolent reasons.




And since hammers kill people yearly more than guns do, sounds like I should be more concerned about a person walking the streets with a hammer than a gun.



Ya, prisons are secure... People don't want THAT MUCH security, yet that's what it would take to get guns out.

It's not about acting like a vigilante, it's about protecting yourself against predators.





Right, but we don't look at "problem cars" and try to ban specific cars, even if they are involved in more deaths than other models (even though the analogy doesn't work in that the weapons that are targeted are involved in the FEWEST CRIMES).



Ya, because the NRA doesn't want to end up like the smokers... Remember, first it was "hey, be nice and take your smoke to the smoking section over there, then they walked off the smoking section to appease the other side, then the non-smokers told te smokers to take it outside, now it's take it down the street...

The NRA, as milk-toast as they are, are not willing to compromise, because once they give an inch the morons will try to take a mile.



You cant take the rights of the minority, actually that's why the rights are listed... Free speech is not to protect popular speech, but to protect what is unpopular,

Stop calling it "gun" violence... It's just violence and people killing people, no different from when Cain killed Abel.

But you wan to look at root causes, look to culture, look to the extent to which the population is medicated from ssri's which have on the label that a "side-effects" include suicide and psychotic episodes...

You can't escape the fact that the last 3 examples in te past century of disarmament led directly to a situation that cost the lives of approximately 200 million people (that's not counting the wars tha occurred simultaneously).

So, ya, if you explain to people that guns are important for more than just shooting, and history ha PROVEN that clearing out the guns from a society, at least more often then not, precedes a culling of the population.

I'm still waiting for the "well, there are too many people" argument that the leftists hold close to their hearts.

Click to expand...

Its time for you to slow down and check your facts. This ".. more people die from hammers than guns.." is just wrong. I know what you are citing. I think when you check this, you will realize the original fact grew legs and wandered way down the street to get to this wrong statement. Perhaps you should take a deep breath, check your facts and try your post again.

The problem with misquoting facts is 1) you people like me taking you into the alley to beat you up and steer you from the point you were trying to make and 2) you have others hearing this, accepting it as truth and further misquoting, or worse, helping it wander even further down the street.

BmanMcfly said:

Right, but we don't look at "problem cars" and try to ban specific cars, even if they are involved in more deaths than other models (even though the analogy doesn't work in that the weapons that are targeted are involved in the FEWEST CRIMES).

Click to expand...

We don't try to ban them but we certainly do stop their production. Dangerous cars are not allowed to be sold in America and if a car is found to be dangerous after production, the car company is often required to fix the problem for free.

BmanMcfly said:

Ya, because the NRA doesn't want to end up like the smokers... Remember, first it was "hey, be nice and take your smoke to the smoking section over there, then they walked off the smoking section to appease the other side, then the non-smokers told te smokers to take it outside, now it's take it down the street...

The NRA, as milk-toast as they are, are not willing to compromise, because once they give an inch the morons will try to take a mile.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about compromise - obviously you haven't taken a good look at my personal stance. I'm talking about changing the rhetoric to address the issues in terms the other side will understand. The NRA shouldn't be talking to appease it's members, that's like preaching to the choir. The NRA should be carrying on constructive dialogue and putting their position in terms non-gun owners will understand. Otherwise, they're just spinning their wheels and putting more mud in the air. That doesn't help. Sadly the NRA seems stuck in the same rut as most modern American businesses, short-term profit over long-term gain.

BmanMcfly said:

You cant take the rights of the minority, actually that's why the rights are listed... Free speech is not to protect popular speech, but to protect what is unpopular,

Stop calling it "gun" violence... It's just violence and people killing people, no different from when Cain killed Abel.

But you wan to look at root causes, look to culture, look to the extent to which the population is medicated from ssri's which have on the label that a "side-effects" include suicide and psychotic episodes...

You can't escape the fact that the last 3 examples in te past century of disarmament led directly to a situation that cost the lives of approximately 200 million people (that's not counting the wars tha occurred simultaneously).

So, ya, if you explain to people that guns are important for more than just shooting, and history ha PROVEN that clearing out the guns from a society, at least more often then not, precedes a culling of the population.

I'm still waiting for the "well, there are too many people" argument that the leftists hold close to their hearts.

Click to expand...

I agree.

It is violence carried out with guns. I understand that it's people killing people and I've said as much many, many times. You should look closer at ALL my posts and quit making assumptions about my agenda. Chances are I think YOU want gun control more than I do.

People using SSRI's are already leaning toward suicide and psychosis or SSRI's wouldn't be prescribed for them. That's a red herring and has been since day one.

Taken as a whole the statistics balance out. Guns are neither good nor bad, just as many, many people have said over and over.

And in how many representative democracies has this happened???

That's as ignorant as the SSRI scare. There ARE too many people, which makes the violence problems worse, but getting rid of the guns won't solve the problems and anyone who thinks otherwise is, well, "unwise". That's why it's important to stress the real problems instead of continuing to address one of the symptoms.

Alex Jones is crazy!!! Sometimes he makes good points, but they get lost in all the scams and conspiracy nonsense that he pulls. I mean selling miracle pills and yelling at people to go out and vote for Ron Paul or we are all doomed?? It's hard to take anyone seriously when they act like emotional children.

MoSurveyor said:

We don't try to ban them but we certainly do stop their production. Dangerous cars are not allowed to be sold in America and if a car is found to be dangerous after production, the car company is often required to fix the problem for free.

Click to expand...

Yes, but still there are 40000 or so vehicular deaths per year... And we barely ever discuss more stringent drivers licensing.

I'm not talking about compromise - obviously you haven't taken a good look at my personal stance. I'm talking about changing the rhetoric to address the issues in terms the other side will understand. The NRA shouldn't be talking to appease it's members, that's like preaching to the choir. The NRA should be carrying on constructive dialogue and putting their position in terms non-gun owners will understand. Otherwise, they're just spinning their wheels and putting more mud in the air. That doesn't help. Sadly the NRA seems stuck in the same rut as most modern American businesses, short-term profit over long-term gain.

Click to expand...

Ya, it's simple "being a victim isnt cool, protect yourself by protecting gun culture."

Or, how many banks would get robbed of half the potential hostages could shoot back? (reality is when that was the case bank robbery was national news).

My concern is that people will appease government by allowing further restrictions on weapons. Then they will soon find themselves like the smokers pushed into obscurity by this type of appeasement. (though, the reasoning for smoking is more legitimate).

I agree.

It is violence carried out with guns. I understand that it's people killing people and I've said as much many, many times. You should look closer at ALL my posts and quit making assumptions about my agenda. Chances are I think YOU want gun control more than I do.

Click to expand...

Well, there are a few that are far more extreme in their anti-gun position... So, sorry of I went too far.

The most I would restrict guns would be from people who have shown that they cannot handle the responsibilities, but even then people should be able to prove themselves competent.

People using SSRI's are already leaning toward suicide and psychosis or SSRI's wouldn't be prescribed for them. That's a red herring and has been since day one.

Click to expand...

And no, it's in the list of contraindications on the package inserts of these drugs that the drugs can CAUSE some people to have a psychotic episodes, or have suicidal thoughts or actions. Even runoff of these drugs have caused shrimp to attack their predators...

Now, yes, some people are suicidal when they get on the medicines, but these drugs are doing something that takes away people's inhibitions and act out on their fantasies...

But, yes, you have a point in that the proportion of people on these drugs that see that kind of side-effect are in a tiny fraction.

Taken as a whole the statistics balance out. Guns are neither good nor bad, just as many, many people have said over and over.

And in how many representative democracies has this happened???

Click to expand...

Germany was a democratic republic...

That's as ignorant as the SSRI scare. There ARE too many people, which makes the violence problems worse, but getting rid of the guns won't solve the problems and anyone who thinks otherwise is, well, "unwise". That's why it's important to stress the real problems instead of continuing to address one of the symptoms.

Click to expand...

Yes, and if Obama cared about that he would come out with a map showing the areas with the highest crime rates / murder rates, and come up with a working strategy to actually tackle the source of most of the violence; ie, poverty and gangs.

BmanMcfly said:

Yes, but still there are 40000 or so vehicular deaths per year... And we barely ever discuss more stringent drivers licensing.

Click to expand...

I'm sure the IIHS and the NTSB would be happy to listen to any arguments you put forth to make our roads more safe.

BmanMcfly said:

Ya, it's simple "being a victim isnt cool, protect yourself by protecting gun culture."

Or, how many banks would get robbed of half the potential hostages could shoot back? (reality is when that was the case bank robbery was national news).

Click to expand...

Again, you're not speaking in the language of the opposition. Most of them don't know about guns and don't want to know about guns. All they know is that guns are lethal weapons, which (to them) makes them dangerous.

BmanMcfly said:

My concern is that people will appease government by allowing further restrictions on weapons. Then they will soon find themselves like the smokers pushed into obscurity by this type of appeasement. (though, the reasoning for smoking is more legitimate).

Click to expand...

I don't believe that would ever happen. There are too many hunters in America - and too many people that know hunters - for hunting rifles and shotguns to ever be outlawed.

BmanMcfly said:

The most I would restrict guns would be from people who have shown that they cannot handle the responsibilities, but even then people should be able to prove themselves competent.

Click to expand...

Are you willing to let the (non-convicted) drug lord own a tank? If not then as far as I'm concerned you agree with gun control.

BmanMcfly said:

Germany was a democratic republic.

Click to expand...

So now the USA is Nazi Germany??? That's comment gets 3/3 ... :lamo :lamo :lamo

It's rhetoric like this that sets the cause back. No one believes such wild crap except those already committed to gun freedom.

BmanMcfly said:

Yes, and if Obama cared about that he would come out with a map showing the areas with the highest crime rates / murder rates, and come up with a working strategy to actually tackle the source of most of the violence; ie, poverty and gangs.

Click to expand...

That information is already available for the USA. What country do you live in?

Liberals do exactly that - they regularly want to increase policing activities including curbing gang violence and try to decrease poverty. Who stops those things from becoming policy?

MoSurveyor said:

I'm sure the IIHS and the NTSB would be happy to listen to any arguments you put forth to make our roads more safe.

Click to expand...

Ya, I'll tell them to ban any vehicle larger than a civic, they are too big and too scary and they move to fast so we must ban them all because im a scared child.

Again, you're not speaking in the language of the opposition. Most of them don't know about guns and don't want to know about guns. All they know is that guns are lethal weapons, which (to them) makes them dangerous.

Click to expand...

Where do most people get their news?? Well, only about half of people pay attention to ANY news.

So, they hear about these tragedies, and don't have really any political thought at all, so quickly buy into the dangers of guns.

Those people aren't going to count in the grand scheme... Im sorry to say, but around half of people just flow through life regardless of their situation. Not saying that as a bad thing, just a truth.

I don't believe that would ever happen. There are too many hunters in America - and too many people that know hunters - for hunting rifles and shotguns to ever be outlawed.

Click to expand...

It can happen, it is happening, through an incremental approach... It would be nearly impossible to clear out all guns, and it would likely create a bloodbath to attempt it...

Or, it could be like Australia where people gave up most of them, and then the rest was tracking down (and often killing) gun owners they encountered, that's how the "real" crocodile Dundee was killed.

Are you willing to let the (non-convicted) drug lord own a tank? If not then as far as I'm concerned you agree with gun control.

Click to expand...

I'm also willing to say that a tank would be prohibitively expensive to drive around, and that the person would be responsible for all damages caused by the tank... And if it was fired would have to prove self-defense. Tanks aren't exactly fuel efficient either...

But, if this person felt like an invasion was in the cards and wanted to protect his lands, well, so long as that is all understood, you would find that even given the option very few would ever even buy a tank. The only self defense a tank offers is that you are in a tank so noone can get to you.

So now the USA is Nazi Germany??? That's comment gets 3/3 ... :lamo :lamo :lamo

Click to expand...

That was not the question,.. The question was whether that happened in democratic republics before... I'm pretty sure the roman empire was also a democratic republic that collapsed due to corruption after turning into a dictatorship.

If the us is anything related to nazi Germany, it would be as a student of.... However, Americans are (or at least have been) fiercely independent and would not put up with any loss of rights.

It's rhetoric like this that sets the cause back. No one believes such wild crap except those already committed to gun freedom.

Click to expand...

What cause are you talking about? What do you know about causes and what helps or hurts one?
The truth, hard cold ugly truth, is the only thing that can save a country that has become the world capitol of lies.

That's why Alex jones screaming truths at piers Morgan became such a huge thing, it shook people out of their trance. There's a reason why he got cut off after 2 segments, rather than the scheduled 3 segments.

That information is already available for the USA. What country do you live in?

Liberals do exactly that - they regularly want to increase policing activities including curbing gang violence and try to decrease poverty. Who stops those things from becoming policy?

Click to expand...

Ya, because of HOW government "helps"... Already the US is the country with the most people incarcerated and it's had little impact on overall crime rates.

Most of the time the solutions offered are worse than the problems they are intending to fix.

BmanMcfly said:

Ya, I'll tell them to ban any vehicle larger than a civic, they are too big and too scary and they move to fast so we must ban them all because im a scared child.

Where do most people get their news?? Well, only about half of people pay attention to ANY news.

So, they hear about these tragedies, and don't have really any political thought at all, so quickly buy into the dangers of guns.

Those people aren't going to count in the grand scheme... Im sorry to say, but around half of people just flow through life regardless of their situation. Not saying that as a bad thing, just a truth.

It can happen, it is happening, through an incremental approach... It would be nearly impossible to clear out all guns, and it would likely create a bloodbath to attempt it...

Or, it could be like Australia where people gave up most of them, and then the rest was tracking down (and often killing) gun owners they encountered, that's how the "real" crocodile Dundee was killed.

That was not the question,.. The question was whether that happened in democratic republics before... I'm pretty sure the roman empire was also a democratic republic that collapsed due to corruption after turning into a dictatorship.

If the us is anything related to nazi Germany, it would be as a student of.... However, Americans are (or at least have been) fiercely independent and would not put up with any loss of rights.

That's why Alex jones screaming truths at piers Morgan became such a huge thing, it shook people out of their trance. There's a reason why he got cut off after 2 segments, rather than the scheduled 3 segments.

Ya, because of HOW government "helps"... Already the US is the country with the most people incarcerated and it's had little impact on overall crime rates.

Most of the time the solutions offered are worse than the problems they are intending to fix.

The truth, hard cold ugly truth, is the only thing that can save a country that has become the world capitol of lies.

Click to expand...

Carry on in ignorance, then --- you'll win few people over to your side this way.

BmanMcfly said:

What cause are you talking about? What do you know about causes and what helps or hurts one?

Click to expand...

A lifetime of living during which many groups have fought the government and defended their rights from others as well, like business owners who thought they could discriminate on the basis of race or sex. Ranting, raving, and signs of paranoia will not help any cause. All you're doing with that approach is alienating others who might otherwise side with you.

BmanMcfly said:

I'm also willing to say that a tank would be prohibitively expensive to drive around, and that the person would be responsible for all damages caused by the tank... And if it was fired would have to prove self-defense. Tanks aren't exactly fuel efficient either...

But, if this person felt like an invasion was in the cards and wanted to protect his lands, well, so long as that is all understood, you would find that even given the option very few would ever even buy a tank. The only self defense a tank offers is that you are in a tank so noone can get to you.

Click to expand...

Why should we care how much it costs buy, or costs to run, or anything else about it's expense? Not my - or your - concern. And of course they'd be responsible for any damage - aren't you responsible for damage from your guns? BTW - tanks, just like Cats, do have rubber treads that can be installed between the cleats.

Who cares why he bought it? Not my business. You can claim some fear as your reason to buy guns but it could be a lie - I have no way of knowing - and honestly I don't care why you bought your guns, it's none of my business. You don't have to justify your purchases of anything to me or anyone else - except your significant other if you have one.


Are you required to prove self-defense when you fire YOUR guns??? Why is the tank owner different - you damn Commie! LOL!

MoSurveyor said:

Carry on in ignorance, then --- you'll win few people over to your side this way.

Click to expand...

I'd say that, on the whole, Alex jones steamrolled over piers, like piers attempts to do with most guests he disagrees with.

A lifetime of living during which many groups have fought the government and defended their rights from others as well, like business owners who thought they could discriminate on the basis of race or sex. Ranting, raving, and signs of paranoia will not help any cause. All you're doing with that approach is alienating others who might otherwise side with you.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, appeasement and political correctness, and most of all complacency have allowed the situation to devolve to the extent that it has.... What America needs more than additional coddling is a serious wake up call... And Alex did deliver that.

Yes, there's a good portion of people that think he's crazy, and I agree, he probly is a little crazy, but he is passionate. The key is not to try and convert everyone anyway, but rather to shake the most amount of people who will look up what was brought up...

Why should we care how much it costs buy, or costs to run, or anything else about it's expense? Not my - or your - concern. And of course they'd be responsible for any damage - aren't you responsible for damage from your guns? BTW - tanks, just like Cats, do have rubber treads that can be installed between the cleats.

Who cares why he bought it? Not my business. You can claim some fear as your reason to buy guns but it could be a lie - I have no way of knowing - and honestly I don't care why you bought your guns, it's none of my business. You don't have to justify your purchases of anything to me or anyone else - except your significant other if you have one.

Click to expand...

Well, if I just say, "yes, people should be able to have tanks", then it comes off as crazy... The key part was that yes, I think a person should be able to buy a tank, but, using the tank would be nearly impossible...

Are you required to prove self-defense when you fire YOUR guns??? Why is the tank owner different - you damn Commie! LOL!

Click to expand...

Lol, and yes, you typically do have to give a report detailing the circumstance leading up to pulling on someone, especially of its fatal, or I would at least expect that to be the case.

BmanMcfly said:

Perhaps, appeasement and political correctness, and most of all complacency have allowed the situation to devolve to the extent that it has.... What America needs more than additional coddling is a serious wake up call... And Alex did deliver that.

Yes, there's a good portion of people that think he's crazy, and I agree, he probly is a little crazy, but he is passionate. The key is not to try and convert everyone anyway, but rather to shake the most amount of people who will look up what was brought up...

Click to expand...

Then he's just preaching to the choir and if that's all you want you got it.

BmanMcfly said:

Lol, and yes, you typically do have to give a report detailing the circumstance leading up to pulling on someone, especially of its fatal, or I would at least expect that to be the case.

Click to expand...

So every time you go out to the farm and target practice you have to file a document? I bet not. I doubt if you even have to do it at the gun range, though, honestly, I wouldn't know. Too many farms around here to bother with a range.

BmanMcfly said:

Well, if I just say, "yes, people should be able to have tanks", then it comes off as crazy... The key part was that yes, I think a person should be able to buy a tank, but, using the tank would be nearly impossible...

Click to expand...

Many people think I am a little crazy, which is why I seldom bring it up - even around here. I say it once and those who have seen my posts in the past know what I mean when I say "All gun control is stupid". It's not my problem if some don't take that at face value ...

MoSurveyor said:

Then he's just preaching to the choir and if that's all you want you got it.

Click to expand...

CNN viewers are most definitely not his "choir"... And that's not what I said Either way.

What I was saying was more that it was aimed at those who have never been exposed to the real issues Of the debate. If you watch again, it's clear what piers approach was, frame the problem as one of how a particular weapon was involved in some heinous crimes, and so we should ban those (eventually all) guns.

Alex was dropping huge facts, especially the ssri connection that actually created a look of panic in piers Morgan.

The impact was clear because he was initially scheduled for a third segment, but was cut off at two.

What's most is that, since CNN ratings got a nice surge in the wake, he's become a discussion piece for days after, if for every 10 people that hear about it then one new person looks for themselves at the facts themselves or whatever, they will eventually see that the facts and history supports maintaining the constitution no matter that it creates some problems, especially for those in control.

The unfortunate fact that there is a new strong push to limit/ end the second amendment as we know it, goes to show just how Late inthe game we are now.

So every time you go out to the farm and target practice you have to file a document? I bet not. I doubt if you even have to do it at the gun range, though, honestly, I wouldn't know. Too many farms around here to bother with a range.

Click to expand...

I meant if you shoot someone and cops are involved, you'll probly wind up filing some sort of report.

Many people think I am a little crazy, which is why I seldom bring it up - even around here. I say it once and those who have seen my posts in the past know what I mean when I say "All gun control is stupid". It's not my problem if some don't take that at face value ...

Click to expand...

Gun control is stupid, it's not so much about the Guns as it is about the control.

It's like I pointed out, if anyone could buy a tank, the free market would make it prohibitively expensive to maintain and would be highly unlikely to ever be in a situation where you could justify its use, that or everyone would drive around in a tank like a status symbol.

BmanMcfly said:

I meant if you shoot someone and cops are involved, you'll probly wind up filing some sort of report.

Click to expand...

You said the tank owner would have to file a report or something when he fired it, not when he killed or injured someone.

Gun control is stupid, it's not so much about the Guns as it is about the control.

It's like I pointed out, if anyone could buy a tank, the free market would make it prohibitively expensive to maintain and would be highly unlikely to ever be in a situation where you could justify its use, that or everyone would drive around in a tank like a status symbol.

Click to expand...

It's easy to justify the use of a tank: "I like them! And it's a real hoot firing one off!" - and the implications for armed resistance against an oppressive government is obvious. Any "justification" you have for owning a semi-automatic rifle with a 30-round clip applies just as well to a tank. That's exactly the reason I say all gun control is stupid. You either accept the rights/justifications to own guns (excluding hunting weapons) or you don't. Stopping at some invisible line in the sand is illogical.


People do drive around in "tanks" as a status symbol, they're called "SUV's".

There are private citizens who own and collect tanks, So why is this even being discussed?
The History channel even has a show about peopel restoring tanks called tank Overhaul, interesting show BTW.
Karl Smith Private WWII Vehicle Collection tour | Facebook
Tank Tour: World's Largest Private Collection of Historic Military Vehicles (BB Video) - YouTube

TheDemSocialist said:

Is Alex Jones "crazy"? I just watched this interview Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan on CNN (FULL ORIGINAL) No Commercial - YouTube with him apparently just yelling at Piers Morgan and all he did was just yell and say "your not gonna get the guns!", "all your gonna do is your factoid questions!", "i already went over the questions", "your a hatchet man for the NWO!". Alex Jones just plays the victim card the whole time and wont even answer a question. Is Alex Jones crazy?!

Click to expand...

Yes, he is passionate. Yes, his views are certainly out there. But I don't think Alex Jones is crazy in any literal sense of the word. I've listened to his show and he has his moments of brilliance. But then he goes off about black helicopters and 9/11 inside job...

I've had my eye on this bad boy for a while now...



It's only $85,000.00 and available for delivery.

Armor Page 1

Who doesn't know it's legal to own tanks and cannon?

Quag said:

There are private citizens who own and collect tanks, So why is this even being discussed?
The History channel even has a show about peopel restoring tanks called tank Overhaul, interesting show BTW.
Karl Smith Private WWII Vehicle Collection tour | Facebook
Tank Tour: World's Largest Private Collection of Historic Military Vehicles (BB Video) - YouTube

Click to expand...

Dammitboy! said:

I've had my eye on this bad boy for a while now...

It's only $85,000.00 and available for delivery.

Armor Page 1

Who doesn't know it's legal to own tanks and cannon?

Click to expand...

I didn't realize the guns were fully functional. The scout cars and one APC I've seen around here have machine guns on them but they're disabled - and I didn't figure they'd let a 120mm loose on the streets.


A T-55, nice!

MoSurveyor said:

I didn't realize the guns were fully functional. The scout cars and one APC I've seen around here have machine guns on them but they're disabled - and I didn't figure they'd let a 120mm loose on the streets.


A T-55, nice!

Click to expand...

Thing is try buying ammo for them

Quag said:

Thing is try buying ammo for them

Click to expand...

I'm sure it's expensive but is it illegal?

MoSurveyor said:

I'm sure it's expensive but is it illegal?

Click to expand...

Not sure I think the biggest problem would be finding someone who had the ammo and was willign to sell it. though with the internet I,m sure it can be done

Quag said:

Not sure I think the biggest problem would be finding someone who had the ammo and was willign to sell it. though with the internet I,m sure it can be done

Click to expand...

Not much fun owning a gun with no way to (legally) acquire ammo for it. That's like having a muscle car Trailer Queen, great to look at but not much use. Personally, I like driving my muscle car a few times a year.

MoSurveyor said:

Not much fun owning a gun with no way to (legally) acquire ammo for it. That's like having a muscle car Trailer Queen, great to look at but not much use. Personally, I like driving my muscle car a few times a year.

Click to expand...

Worst come to worse you could make your own, just probably wont be nearly as effective as the "real" stuff