The guns in question

.50 Barrett


FN Five-Seven



Love this piece in CS

I voted no, If a cop killer wants to kill a cop hes going to, reguardless of what weapon he uses. If people want that gun bad enough they will get it weather its banned or not. On another note holy shit to dat succa.

That is totally going to ruin the deer hunt for some people.

All this does is stop law abiding citizens from owning kick ass guns.

Anyone know if the HK PSG-1 falls under the .50 caliber category too ?

fuck...the 5.7 is a weapon used for killing people...plain and simple, it was designed to penetrate light personel armor...no reason a law abiding person needs one, same goes for .50 cal weapons...

nobody can make a conclusive argument as to why these things should be on the street...and taking them out of the hands of law abiding citizens takes a majority of them out of the hands of criminals...ask any police chief.

good job boston...way to be in a blue state!

I really don'y understand how U.S. cities can pass their own local laws like this. If this was done where I live, it would be a wide-sweeping Provincial law - not just limited to one city.

It must be very confusing for the average citizen to keep track of what is illegal and in which city.

I think it would be a by-law...we have by-laws in winnipeg which they dont have any where else...but ya...I find it weird how each state is run like a little country.

The Bartley/Fox gun law in Massachusetts, which has a mandatory jail term of 1 year for illegally possesing a firearm is hardly new... it has been in effect for years... and it is usually tossed as part of a plea bargain or run concurrently with a sentence, instead of having an additional year of jail time tacked on.

That first one is similar to the one I use in BF2, except they have the M95 in the game, and that one I think is the M90.

And yeah, I don't see why people need to have guns like this.

imho they should ban all firearms (civilian)...

but what if the king of England tries to take back the 13 colonies?

Quoted for truth. The 5-7 is a really nice pistol. While I haven't fired one, a local shop had one and it feels oh so nice. Rather pricey ($1300) and the 5.7mm rounds are expensive too.

Pen and Teller on gun 'control' (28 minute Google video)

i say boo. when was the last time somebody was shot with a .50? laws like this are retarded. my favorite bumper sticker summed it up nicely: "my gun has killed less people than ted kennedy's car"

99.9999% of gang violence is committed with illegal firearms, and gang violence accounts for a vast majority of firearm related deaths in the united states. if all firearms are banned, you will simply have a bunch of civilians unable to protect themselves and hobbyists who can't do something harmless that they enjoy. criminals will get guns no matter what. chicago and DC both have gun bans, yet since those bans were put in place homicides have actually gone up. so much for making laws that protect citizens.

I fail to see how a $8000 gun with ammo costing $5 or so a pop being used in your regular robberies !! Plus its not like you can conceal the damn thing under a trenchcoat or anything !!!

If they wanna ban something ban all fundies and hippies. They are solely responsible for global warming and ferrari making ugly cars.

When they banned guns in Australia wasn't there a huge decline in gun related crimes?

it's a little hard to smuggle things into an island...in america they can just hop across their chice of two borders or come in through our extremely lax port security. look up the facts...chicago and DC homicides have gone up in the past 25 years...a LOT

Man, I wish I had a TV show so I could have people come on my show and support my random Ideas.

I just lost alot of respect for pen and teller (not that I had much to begin with) That show was comeplete BS...anyone who supports their gun ownership with the idea that it is to protect them from the government is an idiot...anyone who claims that gun laws dont work is an idiot.

Laws will never work 100%, but if they work 90, 80 or even 50% of the time, thats better than having no law at all. Fiber, if you dont beleive that...dont wear your seatbelt. it dosent help in 100% of accidents...so it must be worthless.

Just to comment on the eneviatble..."illegal guns cause crime thing" in toronto, 90% of the guns recovered by police from criminals were stolen from law abiding citizens. They recovered one stolen pistol, and were able to associate it with a whole series of murders and robberies.

Now, I'm not saying that this is the primary source (or maybe it is in some places?) of weapons finding their way to the hands of criminals but they do acquire them from a lot of robberies of civilian housings to begin with. Usually, it goes from Criminal with a bone to pick with society -> Breaks into house -> Finds a bunch of guns -> Criminal with a bone to pick with society now packing heat.

And what if it just so happens they break into this house who Johnny GoAmerica has casually left his .50 Barret rifle just laying around?

I'm just saying this because recently (I think it was last month) a bunch of guys broke into the house of this gun collector (he was like 89 years old and had authetnic guns dating back to World War II (including a Luger)) and the guys stole EVERYTHING. A bunch of the guns were obviously in locked cabinets for collection purposes but they just smashed it open. The old man wasn't around when this happened. After cops talked ot the old guy they found out he had over 100 guns and about 80 of them were stolen.

From what I understand crime actually increased after the ban in Australia.



Leif: I have no idea what you are trying to say.
I disagree with your point on gun laws. They do not work. Since when do criminals obey the law? They never have and never will, that is why they are criminals.

For the final fucking time...gun laws are in place to limmit the amount and kinds of guns EVERYONE HAS, a fucking punk in LA dosent go to his local gun shoppe to buy a pistol, he buys it on the street, from someone who probaly stole it from a law abiding citizen. They may not be 100% effective...nothing is...but if it limmits gun violence, then what is the harm? In canada the average person cannot own a pistol...there are ways to aquire them legally, but the process is very long, and anoying...and guess what, there are fewwer guns in criminals hands, and fewwer gun deaths per capita here. why is that? its not lack of racial tension...we have just as big a problem with that here...its because NO ONE HAS A HAND GUN THEREFORE NO ONE CAN AQUIRE ONE THROUGH THEFT!

Ask any chief of police where a majority of the guns on teh street come from, they came from people like you who carry them around. I dont want to have to get on a plane and hit you in the back of the head with a bat, and steal you gun to make my point. Your not protecting your self with your gun, your not protecting your family, you are providing a means for someone to aquire a weapon illegally.

and posting your location and your photograph on the internet, and advertising that you carry a concealed weapon is stupid...If I ever want a 1911 .45 I know where to come...Mobile Alabama...look for a skinny guy in glasses with a sombrero!

You're not protecting yourself with a gun? What kind of skewed logic is that? What happens if and when a criminal breaks into your home with a gun and you have nothing? Are you just going to talk your way out of that or something? Besides, car accidents kill far more people per year than guns. Should we ban cars too? How about knives? Those kill tons of people too.

Besides, it's kinda hard to steal a gun when you have it locked up in a safe.

Yay to more police not getting killed with 0.50cal weapons.

Nay to the government limiting it's citizens.

I could not agree more with that statement. Thus, limiting what sort of guns myself a law abiding person could buy, at a retail store, doesn't make much sense.



I'm quite responsible with my gun, thanks. Right now it's sitting in it's case locked in a safe in an undisclosed location in my house..



Well, I know you won't have a gun on you so I think my chances are good.




Your logic here is amazing.




You're right, perhaps not very wise of me. But I've posted pictures of my house, dog, car, and wife, things I value much more than my gun and those haven't been stolen yet.

DZ your an idiot.

1)Fiber carrys his gun around with him...he has a concealed weapons permit.

2)How is a gun gonna help you when someone breaks into your house if its locked in a safe...

you in over your head...just copy and paste the line in the brackets

{the Z06 is faster than a Veyron}

and stop intrupting non Corvette based discussions.

Yeh, you tell 'im Frankie.

IMO, it's perfectly fine for Frank, or anyone for that matter, to own a firearm. Fiber, correct me if I'm wrong, uses his .45 at a target range, and doesn't brandish it around town like a vigilante. He is a responsible adult and he won't go around shooting squirrils or sheep, despite how fun that may be.

Heh, that point is pretty valid.

"Oh shit! Hold on... uh, don't shoot me, yet. Let me, uh, just get the keys to my safe... oh shit... I, uh, I forgot the combination. Um, uh. Can I borrow your gun for a second? Maybe I can SHOOT it open!"

scenario: i'm in bed. a noise wakes me. i have my gun safe next to my bed. i open that gun safe quickly because i know the combination and don't panic in situations like that. i remove the gun and slowly walk out to where the noise was. i confront a would-be burglar with my gun pointed at him. he has a gun but is not stupid enough to try and use it when he's already staring down the barrel of mine. he leaves.

leif...your arguments are illogical. if somebody breaks into your home and has a gun or knife on them, what are you doing to do? i'm not a big guy personally, so it's not like i can just go around taking people down like i'm steven seagal.


or you can just not own a gun and be at the mercy of anybody who breaks in

Has the M-82 Barrett been used in a single crime? Ever? It's six feet long and 35 lbs, if I recall correctly. Not exactly what you rob a 7-11 with.

This is as dumb as the "assault weapons" law banning bayonet mounts. When is the last time you heard of a drive-by bayonetting? The only people hurt by these laws are collectors.

Haha.... drive-by bayonetting. That's pretty hiliarious, actually.

Posted by Leif

My money is on fiber optic putting a hole in your head before you can get to his gun....

50 cals are far and few, and like others have said, if somone want to kill someone they arent going to give jack about a law. If this government of ours falls apart, which, I don't know, I don't think it is heading in the right direction. Many people will not be prepared. Its not like people havent been killing each other before guns.

Miltov ... read this one fark.com but whatever ... in 17 years there has been 1 possible shooting incident with the barrett. The damn thing costs $8000+. Dont think most theifs can afford that kinda money. And as far as my understanding goes, you can still buy a Remington or a HK PSG-1 any other .50 caliber rifle ... just not the barrett !!! Wheres the logic in that ?

leif: Fiber doesnt live in mobil alabama

^sorry...Madison Alabama...population, 0,000.



Im not saying its probable...but if someone wanted his gun, and knew where to find him it wouldnt be the most impossible thing to do...not that i endorse bat beatings on DS members...I was making a point, that if Fiber gets mugged...one more gun on the street.

Americans and their guns..

I know Kungfu.

its kinda silly. Durring hand gun training the instructors happily inform you that your chances of hitting a target, in a combat situation, with a hand gun, at more than 5m is about 5%, and that anyone who says different has seen too many cop movies.

I cant imagine a civillian having a better chance than a trained Army Officer...

anyway...I have said my piece, and now Im done.

so on one hand, you say it's almost impossible for civilians to hit anything...and on the other hand you are saying civilians with guns are dangerous? well which is it?

Crime in Texas is down. Kids here get guns for their 16th birthdays, and ARE TAUGHT HOW TO FUCKING USE THEM PROPERLY. The more guns, the better. Most folks I know who are anti-gun haven't ever used/owned one. Same argument as talking about a car you haven't driven/don't own - sure, some points are valid, but it doesn't quite work. Leif, I respect your argument, but I'm not sure it works (at least where I live.) Most everyone I know down here has a gun and hasn't had an accident. The girl I had dinner with tonight had her best friend's house broken into by a burglar with a gun. The father shot and killed him, saving his family's life. Situations like that happen more often than the anti-gun lobby would have you know.

I won't get into a pissing contest on here, but some points DZ makes are valid. Guns aren't bad if people know how to use them. A vast majority of gun owners know how to use them. Its a few gangbangers and idiots that ruin the bunch, much like the ricers among car enthusiasts that kill themselves in their Civics.

i think that gun was definitely excessive for civilians.

More than 100bhp is excessive for civilians. Same logic.

explain one real life scenario where that gun would have made any sense. Other than using it at a firing range.

Also, i am no expert in gun laws but you can still buy other .50 Caliber rifles like the PSG-1 which actually do make for a kickass weaponry in urban combact situation.

PSG1 is a 7.62, not a 0.50.

0.50 = 12.50 in the same units as 7.62...so almost 2x as big. In a counrty obsessed with anti terrorism laws, Im very surprised you can even buy any kind of 0.50 cal weapon. the marines claim they can hit a target , accurately, at more than 1600m. Furthermore it caould easily be used to severely damaga a plane on take off or landing...it was designed to take out vehicles...

and DZ...obviously this:

is another example of your inability to read...go back...read slower, use phonics if you have to, and try and figure out what I atcually said.

Blame the victim right? It would be my fault I got mugged.

Just to get all the canadians to shut up:

ATLEAST WE DONT CLUB BABY SEALS TO DEATH EVERY YEAR !!!

It's because Americans live in constant fear that they are relentlessly looking for protection from a linear particle accelerator...

I have always lived in places where guns are banned. I don't really like the idea of knowing that most people around me own a gun. I would be scared if I knew everyone around me own a gun and carry them around. Thus, I would probably do what most Americans do and acquire my own gun. However, does owning a gun mean that I can use it to defend myself effectively? I don't think so. Even with proper training, real life and death situation is totally different from simulations.

Prior to shooting for my own defense, I would have probably asked myself where to shoot him. Do I shoot him to kill or simply to disable him? Do I have the guts to kill someone? Will I regret it after? Maybe this shows my lack of any real training but the main point is will I be able to shoot to kill.

As midnightdorifto said, one of his friend's parent shot and killed a burglar. However, does a simple burglar deserve to die for a crime like this (breaking into a house?) while murderers go in prison? Moreover, did the burglar have intention to kill anyone? Personally, I think that burglars in general don't have any intention to kill (it would make them murderers if they ever get caught). They only carry their weapons to scare you AND will use them if you ever confront them using weapons of your own. Ok so this time, midnightdorifto's friend's parent won and killed the burglar. But what would have happened if the confrontation went wrong? Confronting the burglar will just make him more aggressive and increase your chance of injury. Most burglar only want your properties and not your life.

Now let's get to the root of the problem, where did the burglar acquire his weapon? My house have been broken into once, while my family was asleep. We had a alarm system and two dogs but they were all in the blind spots. The thief did what he had to do, stole my sister's school bag to put whatever he wanted and left without leaving a trace. We woke up in the morning and discovered what happened. Did the thief kill us all after taking our things? If I recall correctly, he stole a few karaoke microphones, a headphone, and some other random stuff but not my laptop that was clearly in sight. The laptop was in my room where I was sleeping. I know he came into my room because he stole a $20 bill which was on my desk, with my laptop next to it. Now why did he steal $20 instead of my laptop? Was it because

1) My laptop was black and he didn't see it in the dark
2) He had a heart and didn't want me to lose my schoolwork
3) He was scared of making too much noise and wake me up

I don't think it's the first reason because if he saw the $20, he would have seen the stupid dell logo on the laptop. It is also not the second reason because he stole my sister's schoolbag which contained her schoolbooks. I think it's probably the third reason because he didn't take much from the rooms where members of our family were sleeping; he mostly took stuff from living rooms and corridors. All this to say that what he wanted was some of our properties and not our life.

I have always wondered what would have happened if I woke up while he was in my room. What would have happened if I tried to confront him? I don't have a accessible weapon with me at the time but do you think he had any firearms whatsoever? What makes you think he came into my house and not others?

From what we noticed, he got into our place through our kitchen window which was not closed properly. I was easily accessible since there is a little balcony platform with emergency stairs leading to the ground in front of that window. All he did was climb up the stairs, open our kitchen window and climbed into our appartment. He did it because he could "break in" without making any noise. I don't think he broke in because he had major firepower with him. After that, we added a fence outside the window and nobody broke into our place again.

The point I am trying to make here is I don't think the person who broke into my place had any gun whatsoever because nobody has a gun here. As leif was saying, most gun used for crimes are often stolen. I don't think a simple burglar is able to afford a gun to rob my place and not make a profit (he didn't even steal anything expensive). If he had a real gun, then I should be happy because I didn't wake up to confront him because:

1) I didn't have a gun and would only make him scared and aggressive by confronting him (putting myself in danger)
2) If I DID have a gun, would I have pointed my gun at him and make him leave, or would I have shot and kill him without any warning? Even if I tried to do the latter, he would have heard my foot steps because of my wood floor cracking sound and prepared himself. In that case, I would have a serious disadvantage. Anyhow, if he had a gun, I don't think he would have broke into my place because we don't have any valuable things anyways. I think he broke in because he could do so without making any noise.

Anyways, I know my argument doesn't hold very much, but I just wanted to add my penny.

You said guns were dangerous because criminals steal them from law abiding citizens and then kill people with them. Then you went on to say most civilians can't hit shit. Criminals are civilians, too. So if the gun is useless to it's owner because you think they can't hit anything in a "combat situation", it would logically be useless to a criminal as well for the exact same reasons. It's just a shame your brain can't handle that.

Like I said, should we outlaw cars, which kill far more people than guns? How about knives? Or rope? Or arsenic? Or rocks? I mean, if you throw a large rock at somebody's head, you can kill them.

And if you would bother to look at the crime stats in America, a VAST majority of gun violence is gang members shooting other gang members. But you don't care about facts, only your own little fantasy world where eliminating guns will magically get rid of gang violence.

It would be your fault if you got mugged and your gun went into the hands of a criminal.

What if your house was robbed, and they stole a kitchen knife that was later used in a murder? Would that be your fault as well?

your comparing a kitchen knife to a gun...do you wake up in the morning and say "Hum...I wonder how I can make my self look stupid today" or is it just a reflex?