PDA

View Full Version : Poll: Which would you rather have


theme57
10-09-2012, 9:13 PM
I thought about this while watching some vids on Canadian shooters and gun reviews. I live in SoCal btw.

So which you would rather have:

A: 5 round capacity for rifles, but no assault weapons law (still the same barrel length requirements).

B: Current CA laws.

Personally thats a hard one for me, because on one hand its nice to have 10 rounds, but having to follow these stupidly thought out assault weapon laws for rifles is painful. On the other hand you would be able to fit your rifle anyway with such as stock and pistol grip, folding stocks and all that good stuff with no bullet button, but having only 5+1 rounds seems a bit painful on reloading often.

xDIEGOx
10-09-2012, 9:21 PM
Given the choices, I prefer the current CA laws. 5 round limit sounds so lame.

VegasND
10-09-2012, 9:32 PM
Can I just set the laws I live under here and now as the minimum and hope for a return of those Rights and Priveleges I'm now being denied?









IOW: I don't like your game and want different rules.

theme57
10-09-2012, 10:22 PM
IMO if CA gun laws were like Alaska it would be great.

AVID HUNTER
10-10-2012, 7:29 AM
So basically, you are asking us if you would prefer a fat chick or an ugly chick?

dls
10-10-2012, 7:54 AM
If could still use my old regular cap mags, NO "assault weapon" law.

Rangem4
10-10-2012, 8:06 AM
C. No Gun Laws.

08GTCS
10-10-2012, 8:20 AM
I prefer Texas laws lol. SBRs, FA, suppressors, all can be had relatively easily here. That and we can run around with 100 round beta mags on our ARs if we feel like it.

IPSICK
10-10-2012, 8:21 AM
If could still use my old regular cap mags, NO "assault weapon" law.

^^^This

If not, we keep fighting against what we have now. Even if the other situation occurs we fight the cap limit anyways.

DannyInSoCal
10-10-2012, 8:42 AM
Would you rather have cancer or aids...?

EL_NinO619
10-10-2012, 8:46 AM
This is not a question. This is a sad reality. Keep up the fight.

Slim///
10-10-2012, 8:49 AM
So basically, you are asking us if you would prefer a fat chick or an ugly chick?

Does the fat chick have a nice face at least? :p

P.Charm
10-10-2012, 8:50 AM
I would want the assault weapons laws lifted, then work on the mag limitations. you give one to take one but the one you are getting back is huge. plus it just means I will shoot slower. I have tons of mags so 5 rd limit means nothing to me (at the range)

AVID HUNTER
10-10-2012, 9:12 AM
Does the fat chick have a nice face at least? :p

If she does, she has a stinky puddy

Siebler
10-10-2012, 9:15 AM
that's a tough call :D

I dont know which way I would prefer.

21SF
10-10-2012, 9:33 AM
I rather have FREEDOM.

defcon
10-10-2012, 9:39 AM
A all the way. Access to more guns > 10 round limits.

joker70
10-10-2012, 9:43 AM
So basically, you are asking us if you would prefer a fat chick or an ugly chick?

Does the fat chick have a nice face at least? :p


LOL Iceberg (pretty face but most of the mass is hidden below) vesus Butter face! You could always hope the Iceberg will go on a diet and excercise.

Legasat
10-10-2012, 12:02 PM
Hmmm...

Leukemia or Lymphoma is really what you are asking.

I can't pick one of those. How about some gun rights in accordance with the Constitution?

451040
10-10-2012, 12:27 PM
dumb poll

stix213
10-10-2012, 12:53 PM
How about a flu that kills anyone infected, or a zombie apoch?

a1c
10-10-2012, 12:54 PM
I can go for the good-looking fat chick, a.k.a. California gun laws.

bob7122
10-10-2012, 1:05 PM
neither, so i won't vote for the lesser of two evils.

POLICESTATE
10-10-2012, 1:35 PM
I'd rather have something that falls into line with the COTUS. Both these options suck.

CK_32
10-10-2012, 1:38 PM
Neither... I want my fu*** second amendment back and the death penalty for all the di**s that ruin our second amendment rights and gave the public reasons to have these laws...

myk
10-10-2012, 1:42 PM
Fat, not obese chicks are nice to play with-a cute/pretty face really helps. Oh and as for the gun rights, we shouldn't have to answer these sorts of questions anyway...

smittty
10-10-2012, 1:48 PM
No thanks, your poll seems political and neither of your options are agreeable to me.

valley82
10-10-2012, 1:52 PM
Neither...I agree with CK erase the gun laws and...use a gun to commit a crime...you get to see the bright light and hear a BANG! Problem solved for less than a dollar.

intensefab
10-10-2012, 2:07 PM
Neither....I live in a free state and can have whatever I want!!

MASTERLAB
10-10-2012, 2:22 PM
I want a belt fed full auto 40mm grenade launcher

tmuller
10-10-2012, 4:06 PM
A all the way. Access to more guns > 10 round limits.

No way am I trading 10 rounds for a flash hider, pistol grip, fpg, adjustable stock, etc...I'm keepin the ammo I have.

joker70
10-10-2012, 4:16 PM
neither, so i won't vote for the lesser of two evils.

http://i50.tinypic.com/29nf60o.jpg

Dead*Reckoned
10-10-2012, 4:17 PM
The only limit for magazine capacity should be your pocket book.

defcon
10-10-2012, 4:26 PM
No way am I trading 10 rounds for a flash hider, pistol grip, fpg, adjustable stock, etc...I'm keepin the ammo I have.

im referring to getting the firearms that are on the AWB list.

and you dont have to abide by that 922 foreign parts list.

defcon
10-10-2012, 4:27 PM
what about 5 round limit with current CA laws? hahaha

RaiderNation
10-10-2012, 4:35 PM
If she does, she has a stinky puddy


Nothing wrong with a stinky puddy - Its added flavor and pheromones :43:

mif_slim
10-10-2012, 4:49 PM
I voted B because I can still go featureless. :D

MrPlink
10-10-2012, 6:12 PM
I want my constitutional rights!
This is the only option if you are a gun owner and true patriot.

gwgn02
10-10-2012, 6:19 PM
F. Get rid of Liberals.

tacticalcity
10-10-2012, 6:52 PM
Neither...stop giving the libs ideas! ;)

SilverTauron
10-10-2012, 6:56 PM
I thought about this while watching some vids on Canadian shooters and gun reviews. I live in SoCal btw.

So which you would rather have:

A: 5 round capacity for rifles, but no assault weapons law (still the same barrel length requirements).

B: Current CA laws.

Personally thats a hard one for me, because on one hand its nice to have 10 rounds, but having to follow these stupidly thought out assault weapon laws for rifles is painful. On the other hand you would be able to fit your rifle anyway with such as stock and pistol grip, folding stocks and all that good stuff with no bullet button, but having only 5+1 rounds seems a bit painful on reloading often.

The F**K?

Are we really running a Poll to see what kind of GUN CONTROL restrictions we'd find most palatable?

Holy Gandhi, this is like the Germans polling their Jewish victims as to whether they prefer death by gas chamber or 9mm pistol. How about we focus on getting our rights back, eh?

Mamluke
10-10-2012, 8:10 PM
I've answered a choice question like this before .... I had my back to a wall in a deep and nasty trench .... :43: .... well; none of the two choices are really optimal or even sensible, but given NO viable alternative; gimme the ammo .... :43: ...

A possible third option: move to a free state and live happily ever after ... :D


.....

.....

Sniper3142
10-10-2012, 8:57 PM
Hmmm...

Leukemia or Lymphoma is really what you are asking.

I can't pick one of those. How about some gun rights in accordance with the Constitution?

+100 to this !^!

The "choices" in your poll are no choice IMHO.

San_Diego_Shooter
10-10-2012, 9:36 PM
I vote for no PRK.