# Here’s the reason people tell me they want to buy an AR-15. And it’s simply ludicrous



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jun 8, 2022)

‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.

I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.

Some members of the tinfoil hat brigade have come up with the reply, “We need these weapons because we want to be effective against the government if it becomes tyrannical. That’s part of our Second Amendment right.” Personally, I think that’s ludicrous, but it has become an increasingly popular justification for purchasing a semi-automatic rifle.

[…]

If banning them outright seems like too extreme a solution to be politically palatable, here’s another option: Reclassify semi-automatic rifles as Class 3 firearms.’









						Opinion: Here's the reason people tell me they want to buy an AR-15. And it's simply ludicrous | CNN
					

No weapon has been more in the public eye than the AR-15, in large part because of the tragic role it has played in some of this country's deadliest shootings, former DC police officer Michael Fanone writes. Fanone, who owns one of the weapons, writes that the AR-15 has the dubious distinction...




					www.cnn.com
				




I disagree with the article’s author about ‘banning’ AR 15s or subjecting them to the provisions of the NFA. ‘Bans’ don’t work, they’re unwarranted government excess and overreach and likely un-Constitutional.

But he’s correct about wanting to own an AR 15 to ‘defend against government tyranny’ as being ridiculous nonsense.

Possessing an AR 15 is a want, not a ‘need.’

And there’s nothing wrong with that; citizens are not required to ‘justify’ exercising a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

As is always the case after a mass shooting or similar event, we see inane, baseless reasons contrived to ‘justify’ owning an AR 15 in a pathetic and unnecessary attempt to fend-off a ‘ban’ of such weapons where there is no political will to do so.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jun 8, 2022)

Here’s the reason people tell me they want to buy an AR-15.​
Because.....fuck you!!!


----------



## lg325 (Jun 8, 2022)

It's just an ugly deer rifle when comes right down to it.  People who are not familiar with firearms go by the way it looks instead of what it is.                                 



Is .223 and 5.56 ammo the same?






*223 rounds are virtually identical in size to 5.56mm rounds*. This means that the majority of the time, . 223 ammunition will chamber and fire in a 5.56mm chamber and vice versa. However, the biggest difference between the two is that 5.56x45mm ammunition is loaded to a significantly higher pressure than .May 12, 2014


----------



## Oddball (Jun 8, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


----------



## yidnar (Jun 8, 2022)

after witnessing the violent mobs looting burning and killing and the demonization and demoralization of the police with instruction from dem leaders to stand down during said riots   maybe they just want extra protection for themselves and their families .


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Jun 8, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...



This, right here, is why, ass clown


----------



## Yarddog (Jun 8, 2022)

Theres a lot of people who collect different types of guns and that is reason enough. There are 10s of millions of Americans who own guns and by far, most of them are sane and would only use such gun for target practice or self defense. You could ban the AR-15, but then after the shooter uses a different type of semi auto rifle, you'll have to ban that too,  and then the semi- auto pistol next. 
   Back ground checks would be much more effective than an outright ban and citizens should still have the right to carry. The problem with background checks might only be, they can be weaponized by politicians who want to do an end around not being able to get guns banned. I'd be curious to see what limitations would be in a background check.

Better yet, while all that is being sorted out, lets protect our schools in the right here and now with armed guards on campus.


----------



## lg325 (Jun 8, 2022)

Yarddog said:


> Theres a lot of people who collect different types of guns and that is reason enough. There are 10s of millions of Americans who own guns and by far, most of them are sane and would only use such gun for target practice or self defense. You could ban the AR-15, but then after the shooter uses a different type of semi auto rifle, you'll have to ban that too,  and then the semi- auto pistol next.
> Back ground checks would be much more effective than an outright ban and citizens should still have the right to carry. The problem with background checks might only be, they can be weaponized by politicians who want to do an end around not being able to get guns banned. I'd be curious to see what limitations would be in a background check.
> 
> Better yet, while all that is being sorted out, lets protect our schools in the right here and now with armed guards on campus.


That helps but remember the mass school shooting down here in Florida. They had armed guards but it did no good.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jun 8, 2022)

lg325 said:


> It's just an ugly deer rifle when comes right down to it.  People who are not familiar with firearms go by the way it looks instead of what it is.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



  Yes 5.56 and .223 are almost the same round. Many AR's can shoot both rounds.
And you really wouldnt want to hunt deer with either round. While yes it will kill a deer it's not really potent enough for a deer rifle.
  The .243 is a bit better but for me the .270 is the right round.
Anything bigger is overkill.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Jun 8, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


I don't want an AR15

I want a fucking belt-fed machine gun.  I am talking M249 SAW or M60.

Why?  Because ye assholes keep saying we can't overthrow our out-of-control government with AR15s.

But, most importantly, because fuck you, that's why. 

My representatives will agree to ZERO gun control or they will agree to get the fuck out. 

The days of TEXIT are quickly approaching.


----------



## Yarddog (Jun 8, 2022)

Bootney Lee Farnsworth said:


> I don't want an AR15
> 
> I want a fucking belt-fed machine gun.  I am talking M249 SAW or M60.
> 
> ...



I want an AR-15 to hang my socks on when they come out of the washer. Ive seen enough film to know the surprise attack always comes when the guy is pinning up the linens on the clothes line.


----------



## lg325 (Jun 8, 2022)

Both fire the same  ammo.
OUT OF STOCK
Browning35344208
Caliber .223 Remington
Condition New
Action Bolt Action
Barrel Length


----------



## Batcat (Jun 8, 2022)

I don’t own an AR-15 as I am not a hunter nor do I target shoot rifles. I mainly target shoot handguns and being an old dinosaur I own more revolvers than semiautomatic pistols. I legally carry a concealed snub nosed revolver for self defense. 

However I wujld buy an AR-15 over other rifles if I wanted a new rifle as the AR-15 platform is very adaptable. An AR-15 can be adapted to different tasks by the owner without requiring the services of a gunsmith. 









						Why millions of Americans — including me — own the AR-15
					

What everyone is getting wrong about the weapon behind some of the worst mass shootings in America.




					www.vox.com
				




***snip***

_
The AR-15 is tremendously flexible and adaptable​If the AR-15 were a weapon that's suitable only for indiscriminate, spray-n-pray mass slaughter, then it wouldn't be so popular with police.

There is no conceivable circumstance in which a police officer — not even a SWAT team member — would need to mow down hordes of people. Yet the AR-15 is the "patrol rifle" of choice for modern police departments from Mayberry to Manhattan. And when you understand why police have adopted the AR-15, then you'll understand yet another reason why I own one.

The AR-15 is less a model of rifle than it is an open-source, modular weapons platform that can be customized for a whole range of applications, from varmint control to taking out 500-pound feral hogs to urban combat. Everything about an individual AR-15 can be changed with aftermarket parts — the caliber of ammunition, recoil, range, weight, length, hold and grip, and on and on.

In the pre-AR-15 era, if you wanted a gun for shooting little groundhogs, a gun for shooting giant feral hogs, and a gun for home defense, you'd buy three different guns in three different calibers and configurations. With the AR platform, a person with absolutely no gunsmithing expertise can buy one gun and a bunch of accessories, and optimize that gun for the application at hand. You can even make an AR-15 into a pistol.

Similarly, the individual members of police and military units can tailor the AR to a specific mission without the help of a professional armorer. Barrels can be swapped out, calibers changed, optics added or removed, and the gun can be totally transformed for every type of encounter, from a long-distance sniper shot at a hostage taker to a close-quarters drug raid in a crowded apartment complex.

So cops and civilians buy AR-15s because that one gun can be adapted to an infinite variety of sporting, hunting, and use-of-force scenarios by an amateur with a few simple tools. An AR-15 owner doesn't have to buy and maintain a separate gun for each application, nor does she need a professional gunsmith to make modifications and customizations. In this respect, the AR-15 is basically a giant Lego kit for grownups._


----------



## Yarddog (Jun 8, 2022)

Batcat said:


> I don’t own an AR-15 as I am not a hunter nor do I target shoot rifles. I mainly target shoot handguns and being an old dinosaur I own more revolvers than semiautomatic pistols. I legally carry a concealed snub nosed revolver for self defense.
> 
> However I wujld buy an AR-15 over other rifles if I wanted a new rifle as the AR-15 platform is very adaptable. An AR-15 can be adapted to different tasks by the owner without requiring the services of a gunsmith.
> 
> ...





OH NO, you cant be right! all the lefty dems here will tell you that the people going out and buying AR-15s are doing it because they want to be Rambo. Of course a lot of them dont know the first thing about guns.
Informative post .


----------



## Batcat (Jun 8, 2022)

Yarddog said:


> OH NO, you cant be right! all the lefty dems here will tell you that the people going out and buying AR-15s are doing it because they want to be Rambo. Of course a lot of them dont know the first thing about guns.
> Informative post .


Liberals often say the AR-15 is a super powerful weapon. For example …









						Congresswoman mocked for saying AR-15s are 'as heavy as' 10 moving boxes and fire .50 caliber bullets
					

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee incorrectly claimed that AR-15 rifles fire .50 caliber ammunition and that the weapons are “as heavy as 10 boxes that you might be moving.”




					www.washingtonexaminer.com
				




The sad part is many liberals believe such bullshit when told by an elected Democrat. They can’t believe a Democrat would lie like that and will tell you only Republicans lie.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 27, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.


Thats a damn lie

AR-15 owners know exactly why they want one


Clueless lib quote of the day:

“*they all appear to be armed”*

*“And there does not appear to be any burning and looting where they are”*

Gee, I wonder why?


----------



## Seymour Flops (Jun 27, 2022)

I'm guessing that Ukrainians wish they had had a second amendment allowing them to buy AR15's before the invasion.

You could make them feel better by explaining to them that AR's are useless when fighting an authoritarian government.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 27, 2022)

lg325 said:


> That helps but remember the mass school shooting down here in Florida. They had armed guards but it did no good.



No, they didn’t have armed guards.

Parkland had one police resource officer for 10-12  buildings on the campus……..and when the shooting started he left the building he was  in.


----------



## mtlhdtodd (Jul 3, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


 Because it's  called the Bill of Rights, not the bill of needs.  Then there is that shall not be infringed part.  Leftists have never very good at comprehension,  just over excited emotional bullshit artists, whose world view is blocked by their ass. 

I don't need to articulate a reason to own one.  All I need is the correct amount of cash and be legally able to own. All the hyperbole of the left is just oral diarrhea.


----------



## Shawnee_b (Jul 5, 2022)

Batcat said:


> Liberals often say the AR-15 is a super powerful weapon. For example …
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Shiela Jackass Lee is dumber than your average liberal which is pretty dumb and uninformed. She also asked if Rover could turn around and take a picture of the flag the astronauts left on Mars.


----------



## Batcat (Jul 5, 2022)

Shawnee_b said:


> Shiela Jackass Lee is dumber than your average liberal which is pretty dumb and uninformed. She also asked if Rover could turn around and take a picture of the flag the astronauts left on Mars.


Reminds me of Hank Johnson who was worried about Guam capsizing. 









						Hank Johnson Worries Guam Could "Capsize" After Marine Buildup
					

Georgia Democratic Rep. Draws Ridicule for Using Interesting Language to Express Concerns about a Planned New Military Base on the U.S. Territory




					www.cbsnews.com


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


It's the only real argument gun nuts have, "Fuck off, we like guns". All their rhetoric is copy and pasted fallacies.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It's the only real argument gun nuts have, "Fuck off, we like guns". All their rhetoric is copy and pasted fallacies.


True – it isn’t an ‘argument,’ it’s a fallacy; confirmation bias, to be specific.

It’s also baseless political rhetoric – fearmongering and demagoguery; the lie that guns are going to be ‘banned’ and ‘confiscated’ as some nefarious plot to usher in a ‘totalitarian state.’

That’s why there’s no ‘need’ for an AR 15; there are other firearms far superior for effective self-defense.


----------



## Batcat (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> True – it isn’t an ‘argument,’ it’s a fallacy; confirmation bias, to be specific.
> 
> It’s also baseless political rhetoric – fearmongering and demagoguery; the lie that guns are going to be ‘banned’ and ‘confiscated’ as some nefarious plot to usher in a ‘totalitarian state.’
> 
> That’s why there’s no ‘need’ for an AR 15; there are other firearms far superior for effective self-defense.


Since you state there are other firearms superior to the AR-15 for self defense, what firearms do you recommend? 

Let’s set up a scenario.

 Four armed intruders are invading your home. 

What firearm do you recommend in that situation? 

Now admittedly the chances of that happening are slim and that is one of the more extremely circumstances I can imagine. However if the firearm you recommend will handle that situation it should handle lesser problems as well. 

Now at this time I don’t own a AR-15 or a similar semi-auto rifle. For home defense I rely on revolvers and a double barreled coach gun. However if I was worried about a home invasion by four armed intruders I would seriously consider buying a semi-auto rifle such as the AR-15 or the Ruger Mini-14.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


I don't ever go into any store without knowing what I am going to buy.

And needs have nothing to do with rights.

Biden wants to ban 9mm handguns for no reason other that it happens to be the most popular caliber for a handgun.
The AR 15 just happens to be the most popular rifle platform for the 5.56 round.


Your "logic" is to blame the most popular brand of something and everyone who just happens to own one for all the ill committed by a minuscule fraction of a percent of people who happen to own the same object.

It's no different than saying if we ban Bud Light, the most popular beer in the US, then we can end all incidences of drunk driving.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 16, 2022)

I do not own an AR platform rifle.

I do own a couple rifles that are chambered for a larger caliber round though.

And the people I know who own an AR platform rifle chambered for 5.56mm ammmo have told me they own one because it is a good balance between weight and power that is easy enough for the wives to handle if they need to as well as a good rifle for vermin and small game.  IOW it can be used in a variety of situations


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> True – it isn’t an ‘argument,’ it’s a fallacy; confirmation bias, to be specific.
> 
> It’s also baseless political rhetoric – fearmongering and demagoguery; the lie that guns are going to be ‘banned’ and ‘confiscated’ as some nefarious plot to usher in a ‘totalitarian state.’
> 
> That’s why there’s no ‘need’ for an AR 15; there are other firearms far superior for effective self-defense.


Dumb as dirt


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

No one need a vehicle that has 450 horsepower m


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> True – it isn’t an ‘argument,’ it’s a fallacy; confirmation bias, to be specific.
> 
> It’s also baseless political rhetoric – fearmongering and demagoguery; the lie that guns are going to be ‘banned’ and ‘confiscated’ as some nefarious plot to usher in a ‘totalitarian state.’
> 
> That’s why there’s no ‘need’ for an AR 15; there are other firearms far superior for effective self-defense.



  Name them.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It's the only real argument gun nuts have, "Fuck off, we like guns". All their rhetoric is copy and pasted fallacies.




Nope.....


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 16, 2022)

Batcat said:


> Since you state there are other firearms superior to the AR-15 for self defense, what firearms do you recommend?
> 
> Let’s set up a scenario.
> 
> ...




Batcat...let me take a stab at this....


How about this..... I'll just make up a situation off the top of my head....

You own a business in a city, and the democrat party has ordered blm and antifa, their brown shirt thugs, to burn, loot and kill in your neighborhood to make it hard for the republican candidate to win an election......the democrat mayor of the city has ordered the police to stand down and do nothing to stop this attack.... a large crowd of blm, and antifa brown shirts have indeed burned and looted the various businesses around you and your business is next in line............

Which firearm do you recommend in this fanciful situation?


----------



## Failzero (Jul 16, 2022)

Shower FAL


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 16, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Batcat...let me take a stab at this....
> 
> 
> How about this..... I'll just make up a situation off the top of my head....
> ...


Let's take the hypothetical further, Batcat shouted, "Go home", to the crowd, they dispersed and went home. No selected gun needed.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Let's take the hypothetical further, Batcat shouted, "Go home", to the crowd, they dispersed and went home. No selected gun needed.




Yeah.......except for 7 months that didn't work and 2 billion dollars in destroyed businesses and lives and about 40 murdered people  show you how that doesn't work......


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Let's take the hypothetical further, Batcat shouted, "Go home", to the crowd, they dispersed and went home. No selected gun needed.




You will be interested.....one of those self defense shootings you say doesn't happen....









						#27: Concealed carry holder shot man who opened fire on his car at McDonald's, prosecutors say. (The 'man' has 3 pending felony cases in juvenile court)
					

A 19-year-old man who has three felony juvenile cases pending was shot three times by a concealed carry holder after he opened fire on the man's car in a McDonald's parking lot Tuesday, prosecutors said.




					cwbchicago.com


----------



## WinterBorn (Jul 16, 2022)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Yes 5.56 and .223 are almost the same round. Many AR's can shoot both rounds.
> And you really wouldnt want to hunt deer with either round. While yes it will kill a deer it's not really potent enough for a deer rifle.
> The .243 is a bit better but for me the .270 is the right round.
> Anything bigger is overkill.



Thank you.

In many states it is illegal to hunt deer with a .223.    And that is smart.

I agree with you the right round for whitetail deer is the .270.   I have never lost a deer I shot with a .270.  Most didn't take another step.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 16, 2022)

2aguy said:


> You will be interested.....one of those self defense shootings you say doesn't happen....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well retard, the Harvard study did say that most of the claimed self protection incidents were debunked. Did you notice the word, "Most". Now you claim, "Shootings you say never happen". You are a lying piece of Democrat shit.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Well retard, the Harvard study did say that most of the claimed self protection incidents were debunked. Did you notice the word, "Most". Now you claim, "Shootings you say never happen". You are a lying piece of Democrat shit.




The harvard study was a joke.....


----------



## Flash (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


I have many things that I want, rather than need.

However I "need" an AR15 for three reasons:

1.  For recreational purposes.  I enjoy shooting and collecting and building ARs so it provides much enjoyed and needed recreation activity for me.

 2.  For self defense.  I doubt I will ever have to use to for self defense but if I do then I would really need it bad.

3.  I "need" it for the "security of a free state", as stated in the Constitution.

If you don't need or want one then don't buy one.  Nobody gives a shit.  Just keep your nose out of my business, especially my Constitutional rights.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jul 16, 2022)

I think an AR would do fine as a defensive firearm.   And I support law abiding citizens being able to buy them.

But there are some other guns I think serve that purpose better.     The AR, even in a shorter, tactical setup, is a bit awkward in the house.

1) A semi auto handgun would work great.   I have a 1911 in my nightstand in a locked vault.  It is more maneuverable in tight spaces and plenty accurate for the job.
2) A revolver of a sufficient caliber.   They work every time and jams are exceedingly rare.    A .357 revolver would be an excellent choice.
3) A pump shotgun.   In addition to the fear factor of hearing a pump shotgun action being worked to chamber a round, it is powerful and will not over penetrate walls.  The biggest drawback, imho, is the same as the AR.  It is too long.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Let's take the hypothetical further, Batcat shouted, "Go home", to the crowd, they dispersed and went home. No selected gun needed.


It didn't work during the summer of love riots.


----------



## Batcat (Jul 16, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Batcat...let me take a stab at this....
> 
> 
> How about this..... I'll just make up a situation off the top of my head....
> ...


Obviously an AR-15 or similar semiautomatic rifle.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 16, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The harvard study was a joke.....


You are now known as LPofDS


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 16, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> It didn't work during the summer of love riots.


Because you didn't disperse?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> I think an AR would do fine as a defensive firearm.   And I support law abiding citizens being able to buy them.
> 
> But there are some other guns I think serve that purpose better.     The AR, even in a shorter, tactical setup, is a bit awkward in the house.
> 
> ...


A pump shotgun has limited capacity, to much kick for smaller frame people and take experience to reload in a stressful event. 
Revolver limited capacity 
Semiautomatic pistol depending on the caliber will be too powerful for most women, so if you go down to a 380 you're back to limited capacity.
Women most of them are a better shot with an AR and it doesn't have the kick.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Because you didn't disperse?


Because they didn't disperse which makes your belief stupid.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jul 16, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> A pump shotgun has limited capacity, to much kick for smaller frame people and take experience to reload in a stressful event.
> Revolver limited capacity
> Semiautomatic pistol depending on the caliber will be too powerful for most women, so if you go down to a 380 you're back to limited capacity.
> Women most of them are a better shot with an AR and it doesn't have the kick.



All good points.   The limited capacity of the revolver is less of an issue if you practice a lot with a speedloader.   My g/f can reload her revolver 4 or 5 seconds.  It will probably take that long for the bad guys to realize she might be out of rounds.

I think a 9mm semi auto won't produce too much recoil for most smaller people.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jul 16, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> A pump shotgun has limited capacity, to much kick for smaller frame people and take experience to reload in a stressful event.
> Revolver limited capacity
> Semiautomatic pistol depending on the caliber will be too powerful for most women, so if you go down to a 380 you're back to limited capacity.
> Women most of them are a better shot with an AR and it doesn't have the kick.



  I agree for the most part.
I've found that I can reload my revolver every bit as fast as my .45,of course thats using moon clips.
  It takes about two seconds.....


----------



## WinterBorn (Jul 16, 2022)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Yes 5.56 and .223 are almost the same round. Many AR's can shoot both rounds.
> And you really wouldnt want to hunt deer with either round. While yes it will kill a deer it's not really potent enough for a deer rifle.
> The .243 is a bit better but for me the .270 is the right round.
> Anything bigger is overkill.



One point to make about using a .223/5.56mm for hunting is the performance of the round.

While I agree that it is unsuitable for deer, that may just be my own prejudice.    One of the most popular guns for hog hunting is an AR.   And hogs are tough animals.

A .22 caliber bullet is not suitable in most cases.    But the .223/5.56mm has the advantage that the bullet is hauling ass.    At such high speeds the hydrostatic shock destroys organs and will usually drop a medium size wild pig, or a human.   Plus they are very accurate rounds.

I had an AR that I built specifically for coyote hunting 10 or 15 years ago.    It was a tack driver.   And the lack of recoil and the speed of the followup rounds made it possible for me to get a pair of "twofers" (2 coyote for one calling).    But a guy who lived near me kept offering me more money.   So I sold it.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> But he’s correct about wanting to own an AR 15 to ‘defend against government tyranny’ as being ridiculous nonsense.
> ,,,
> 
> As is always the case after a mass shooting or similar event, we see inane, baseless reasons contrived to ‘justify’ owning an AR 15 in a pathetic and unnecessary attempt to fend-off a ‘ban’ of such weapons where there is no political will to do so.



Besides domestic criminals and external invaders, the biggest threat any society always faces if domestic tyranny.
All governments become tyrannical eventually.
Anyone who does not realize that obvious historic fact, and prepare for it, is either ignorant, lazy, or a traitor.

Banning civilian weapons is an obvious increase in tyranny.
Civilians can be trusted with these weapons much more than mercenary police or the military.
It is always the police and military who convert democracies into dictatorships.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jul 16, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> One point to make about using a .223/5.56mm for hunting is the performance of the round.
> 
> While I agree that it is unsuitable for deer, that may just be my own prejudice.    One of the most popular guns for hog hunting is an AR.   And hogs are tough animals.
> 
> ...



   There's a ranch down I-10 between Houston and San Antonio that specializes in hog hunts.
They used to not allow you to use 5.56 but with the newer rounds they've come up with he changed the rules.
    He brought up the Swine Smasher round in particular.


----------



## Circe (Jul 16, 2022)

yidnar said:


> after witnessing the violent mobs looting burning and killing and the demonization and demoralization of the police with instruction from dem leaders to stand down during said riots   maybe they just want extra protection for themselves and their families .


THIS of course is actually why gun guys are all getting AR-15s. Duh. Mobs. 

People don't care to say that, of course. Nor should they. 

Considering the serious breakdown of law and order I think it's a very good idea to be well armed.


----------



## Circe (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It's the only real argument gun nuts have, "Fuck off, we like guns". All their rhetoric is copy and pasted fallacies.


No, we just don't like to talk to you about it. Why would we?


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jul 16, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> Besides domestic criminals and external invaders, the biggest threat any society always faces if domestic tyranny.
> All governments become tyrannical eventually.
> Anyone who does not realize that obvious historic fact, and prepare for it, is either ignorant, lazy, or a traitor.
> 
> ...



   I noticed Clayton never told us which firearms were more effective than the A/R.
Wonder why?


----------



## Flash (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Because you didn't disperse?


The shitheads that tried to kill Kyle Rittenhouse sure as hell "dispersed" after he shot three of the sonofabitches with his AR, didn' they?


----------



## there4eyeM (Jul 16, 2022)

The "AR" looks like the real thing. The "AR" is the real thing in disguise. It is a wannabe, and those who want it are, too.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jul 16, 2022)

there4eyeM said:


> The "AR" looks like the real thing. The "AR" is the real thing in disguise. It is a wannabe, and those who want it are, too.



The funny thing, after I sold my AR I bought a Ruger Mini-14.  Same caliber.    At the local range I had gotten some looks for my AR, but never did for my Ruger.   A big part of the AR's issue is pure cosmetics.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jul 16, 2022)

there4eyeM said:


> The "AR" looks like the real thing. The "AR" is the real thing in disguise. It is a wannabe, and those who want it are, too.



  Actually it does a great job for what its intended purpose is.
It's lightweight,holds a decent amount of ammo,it's accurate and it provides multiple places to mount lights,lasers,scopes.....etc.
   More people are killed in military conflicts by single well aimed shots than fully automatic fire.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jul 16, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Semiautomatic pistol depending on the caliber will be too powerful for most women, so if you go down to a 380 you're back to limited capacity.



Ruger, CZ, and Beretta all sell high capacity magazine pistols in .380.
That is because .380 is sort of a world standard for police, outside the US.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> I agree for the most part.
> I've found that I can reload my revolver every bit as fast as my .45,of course thats using moon clips.
> It takes about two seconds.....


But most people unless they practice under stressful real time events can't do it


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jul 16, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The funny thing, after I sold my AR I bought a Ruger Mini-14.  Same caliber.    At the local range I had gotten some looks for my AR, but never did for my Ruger.   A big part of the AR's issue is pure cosmetics.



  The only advantage the A/R has is the plethora of mounting points for scopes,lasers,lights and whatnot.
Of course you can buy after market furniture to fix that problem but at that point you might as well get an A/R.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jul 16, 2022)

Flash said:


> The shitheads that tried to kill Kyle Rittenhouse sure as hell "dispersed" after he shot three of the sonofabitches with his AR, didn' they?



But one should not being an open weapon to an sort of disturbance.
Too provocative.
Threatening by mere presence.
Shooting 3 people means you are doing something wrong.
A single warning shot would have likely sufficed.  
At a foot away, it also is not necessary to kill, when wounding would suffice.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> Ruger, CZ, and Beretta all sell high capacity magazine pistols in .380.
> That is because .380 is sort of a world standard for police, outside the US.


You won't find anything bigger than 10 rounds


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jul 16, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> But most people unless they practice under stressful real time events can't do it



   True enough.
 It's like accuracy,everything changes when the bullets start to fly.
  It took me around two weeks of practice to get the motions down,In a real fight I'd take a little slower over faster where you fuck up trying to hard.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jul 16, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> But most people unless they practice under stressful real time events can't do it



The practice is critical.  Building the muscle memory makes it more likely that you will do it right when you need it.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jul 16, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> But one should not being an open weapon to an sort of disturbance.
> Too provocative.
> Threatening by mere presence.
> Shooting 3 people means you are doing something wrong.
> ...



   If someone is trying to bash my brains out with a skateboard I'm shooting to kill.
And where are you going to aim that warning round in the city?


----------



## Flash (Jul 16, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> But one should not being an open weapon to an sort of disturbance.
> Too provocative.
> Threatening by mere presence.
> Shooting 3 people means you are doing something wrong.
> ...


You are confused.  Self defense is doing something right.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 16, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The funny thing, after I sold my AR I bought a Ruger Mini-14.  Same caliber.    At the local range I had gotten some looks for my AR, but never did for my Ruger.   A big part of the AR's issue is pure cosmetics.




And anti-AR hype.....the anti-gun fanatics are making this a popular rifle with nuts......which is what they want....


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 16, 2022)

Batcat said:


> Since you state there are other firearms superior to the AR-15 for self defense, what firearms do you recommend?
> 
> Let’s set up a scenario.
> 
> ...


The right’s fearmongering and lies about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscations’ are even more ridiculous given the fact that there’s no political will in Congress to enact any firearm regulatory measures, and an activist conservative Supreme Court likewise hostile to such laws.

That’s why conservatives should stop with the moronic lies about ‘needing’ an AR 15.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 16, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> But one should not being an open weapon to an sort of disturbance.
> Too provocative.
> Threatening by mere presence.
> Shooting 3 people means you are doing something wrong.
> ...




You never fire warning shots.....where do you think that will go?


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The right’s fearmongering and lies about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscations’ are even more ridiculous given the fact that there’s no political will in Congress to enact any firearm regulatory measures, and an activist conservative Supreme Court likewise hostile to such laws.
> 
> That’s why conservatives should stop with the moronic lies about ‘needing’ an AR 15.




There is no will to do it right now because we let people know exactly what they want to do if they get power.....


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 16, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> I think an AR would do fine as a defensive firearm.   And I support law abiding citizens being able to buy them.
> 
> But there are some other guns I think serve that purpose better.     The AR, even in a shorter, tactical setup, is a bit awkward in the house.
> 
> ...


Correct – no ‘need’ for an AR 15; there are other far better weapons for self-defense.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 16, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> Besides domestic criminals and external invaders, the biggest threat any society always faces if domestic tyranny.
> All governments become tyrannical eventually.
> Anyone who does not realize that obvious historic fact, and prepare for it, is either ignorant, lazy, or a traitor.
> 
> ...


Wrong.

No one is advocating ‘banning’ civilian possession of firearms – including AR 15s.

The notion of ‘needing’ an AR 15 to ‘defend against government tyranny’ is ridiculous nonsense because the military will cut down armed civilians remotely with drones.

The government has no fear of civilians with semi-automatic small arms.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 16, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> A pump shotgun has limited capacity, to much kick for smaller frame people and take experience to reload in a stressful event.
> Revolver limited capacity
> Semiautomatic pistol depending on the caliber will be too powerful for most women, so if you go down to a 380 you're back to limited capacity.
> Women most of them are a better shot with an AR and it doesn't have the kick.


Subjective preferences, wants – not justifying a ‘need.’

Using shotguns and handguns instead of an AR in no manner diminishes or undermines the ability of a private citizen to successfully defend his home or himself from attack.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 16, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> But the .223/5.56mm has the advantage that the bullet is hauling ass.


This is also a disadvantage for HD – apartment dwellings in particular, where overpenetration is an issue.

A bullet with a MV of over 3100 fps can kill your sleeping child in the next bedroom or your neighbor in the apartment next-door.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 16, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Because they didn't disperse which makes your belief stupid.


No, we were given a hypothetical question, so I gave a hypothetical answer.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 16, 2022)

Circe said:


> No, we just don't like to talk to you about it. Why would we?


Because your argument has no substance.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 16, 2022)

Flash said:


> The shitheads that tried to kill Kyle Rittenhouse sure as hell "dispersed" after he shot three of the sonofabitches with his AR, didn' they?


If idiots go to protests......


----------



## Circe (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Because your argument has no substance.


We aren't arguing.

We're just buying guns.

Why bother to argue?

You can't stop us.

Works for me.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 16, 2022)

Circe said:


> We aren't arguing.
> 
> We're just buying guns.
> 
> ...


Because your argument has no substance.


----------



## Circe (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Because your argument has no substance.


Lots of substance:

The substance is, you can't stop us, so you are irrelevant. No point in arguing with irrelevant posters.


----------



## Circe (Jul 16, 2022)

My husband just signed up for one of those concealed carry classes. His friend got in (it's a circus here, hundreds of people trying to sign up) and somehow got him on the list. 

You are losing, Mr. Irrelevant. There is no use in anyone arguing with people who have lost the argument.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> This is also a disadvantage for HD – apartment dwellings in particular, where overpenetration is an issue.
> 
> A bullet with a MV of over 3100 fps can kill your sleeping child in the next bedroom or your neighbor in the apartment next-door.



I believe I mentioned that when I suggested other, more appropriate, firearms for self defense.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> But one should not being an open weapon to an sort of disturbance.
> Too provocative.
> Threatening by mere presence.
> Shooting 3 people means you are doing something wrong.
> ...



*A single warning shot would have likely sufficed.*

Meh.

*At a foot away, it also is not necessary to kill, when wounding would suffice.*

Lefty agrees. The two dead felons couldn't be reached for comment.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2022)

2aguy said:


> You never fire warning shots.....where do you think that will go?



He thinks they don't go anywhere. And never harm anyone. 

And he thinks they're mandatory. Failure to fire one means you're guilty of murder.

He's not very bright.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Subjective preferences, wants – not justifying a ‘need.’
> 
> Using shotguns and handguns instead of an AR in no manner diminishes or undermines the ability of a private citizen to successfully defend his home or himself from attack.


Show me the fucking word need in the bill of rights you dumbass bastard? 
And again you don't have any experience with firearms.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> No, we were given a hypothetical question, so I gave a hypothetical answer.


Nope what happened wasn't hypothetical.


----------



## Batcat (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The right’s fearmongering and lies about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscations’ are even more ridiculous given the fact that there’s no political will in Congress to enact any firearm regulatory measures, and an activist conservative Supreme Court likewise hostile to such laws.
> 
> That’s why conservatives should stop with the moronic lies about ‘needing’ an AR 15.


I personally don’t own a semi-automatic rifle that resembles a military weapon but there may be a time when I do have a reason to own one. 

I live in a rural area of Florida and while there are deer on the property I am not a hunter. If a herd of feral hogs shows up, an AR-15 would be an excellent weapon to eliminate these pests. 

I am far enough out in the country that it is unlikely that a mob of Antifa or BLM rioters will attempt to burn my house down. If that was a real concern I would acquire a couple AR-15s. 

I am an old dinosaur that prefers revolvers to high cap pistols. The only rifle I own is a bolt action Swiss Mauser. I also own a 12 gauge double barreled coach gun for self defense. 

If I was a hunter I would possibly be interested in buying an AR-15. They are very adaptable and one rifle can perform many different tasks. Plus a gun smith is not required for most modifications to the weapon. Why own half a dozen rifles when you can just own one. 









						AR-15 Calibers And Cartridges: What Should You Chamber Your Carbine?
					

AR-15 Calibers and cartridges are legion, finding the right one is a matter of matching it to the job you want your rifle to perform.




					gundigest.com
				












						17 Best AR-15 Upgrades (2022 UPDATED) All You Need to Know
					

An AR-15 rifle is already a powerful firearm, so owning one would probably be a dream come true. However, as powerful as it can be, some of the best AR-15 upgrades...




					lundestudio.com


----------



## Flash (Jul 16, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> If idiots go to protests......


Certainly like all those BLM and ANTIFA shitheads.


----------



## Flash (Jul 16, 2022)

Batcat said:


> If I was a hunter I would possibly be interested in buying an AR-15. They are very adaptable and one rifle can perform many different tasks. Plus a gun smith is not required for most modifications to the weapon. Why own half a dozen rifles when you can just own one.


I have an old Army buddy that lives on a ranch in the area west of the Miami metroplex.  Bordering the Everglades.  The ranch is over 1K acres.

They are being overrun with feral hogs.

A few years ago he invited a dozen of his buddies to come down and spend a long weekend hunting the hogs.  All of us had AR-15s type firearms except for one guy with an AR-10.

I brought my Class III M-16 and used it on full auto.  Two other guys had M-16s.

We killed 33 hogs that weekend.  We probably wounded another 20-30 more that got away and we didn't find the carcasses.  They were hard to hit.  I would open F-A fire on a sounder of maybe 15 hogs and be lucky to hit two of them before they scattered.  They are fast.

We got better as the time went on but it was not easy.

A year later he said there was just about as many hogs as it there were before the hunt.  An expert told him that there needed to be a 80% kill of the sounder to affect population decline.

He went ahead and hired an expert trapper and within two years got rid of most of them.

This is the method he used.


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


Why do you 'press' customers?  I'd fire your ass in a hot second for that.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Subjective preferences, wants – not justifying a ‘need.’
> 
> Using shotguns and handguns instead of an AR in no manner diminishes or undermines the ability of a private citizen to successfully defend his home or himself from attack.



Nope…..the Supreme Court already ruled that just because there are options doesnt allow you idiots to ban types of guns


----------



## Leo123 (Jul 16, 2022)

Flash said:


> I have an old Army buddy that lives on a ranch in the area west of the Miami metroplex.  Bordering the Everglades.  The ranch is over 1K acres.
> 
> They are being overrun with feral hogs.
> 
> ...


Cool Vid!!  I'm just a city boy.....Do you eat those swine?


----------



## fncceo (Jul 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.



OMG ... people legally buying something they want to buy?!

How can our society survive?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2022)

fncceo said:


> OMG ... people legally buying something they want to buy?!
> 
> How can our society survive?
> 
> View attachment 671044



Is that Clayton on his fainting couch?


----------



## Flash (Jul 16, 2022)

Leo123 said:


> Cool Vid!!  I'm just a city boy.....Do you eat those swine?


In the wild these Florida feral pigs mostly eat acorns.  That makes the meat bitter in addition to being  gamey.

I would eat the meat if there was nothing else available.  However, it not the best.

We had BBQ on that hunt but not any of those wild pigs we shot.

We burned the carcasses we shot.  We probably should have given the meat to some food bank but it was easier to just throw them in a pile and set fire.


----------



## Seymour Flops (Jul 16, 2022)

Mac-7 said:


> Thats a damn lie
> 
> AR-15 owners know exactly why they want one
> 
> ...


The clueless libs thought, 'if there isn't any burning and looting where they are, why do they need to be armed?  Stupid gun nuts!'


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 17, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> A pump shotgun has limited capacity, to much kick for smaller frame people and take experience to reload in a stressful event.
> Revolver limited capacity
> Semiautomatic pistol depending on the caliber will be too powerful for most women, so if you go down to a 380 you're back to limited capacity.
> Women most of them are a better shot with an AR and it doesn't have the kick.


I have to agree.

I never even considered a revolver for carry or home de fence.

Actually the only revolver I've ever been interested in is the Stairs Judge because it can fire a 410 shotgun cartridge and a .45 pistol round


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 17, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The funny thing, after I sold my AR I bought a Ruger Mini-14.  Same caliber.    At the local range I had gotten some looks for my AR, but never did for my Ruger.   A big part of the AR's issue is pure cosmetics.


I have a mini 30 chambered for 7.62  mm rounds and no one even looks twice at it


----------



## WinterBorn (Jul 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> I have a mini 30 chambered for 7.62  mm rounds and no one even looks twice at it



Exactly.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 17, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Exactly.


I wonder if that would change if most people knew that round is the same one AK 47s are chambered for.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 17, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> True – it isn’t an ‘argument,’ it’s a fallacy; confirmation bias, to be specific.
> 
> It’s also baseless political rhetoric – fearmongering and demagoguery; the lie that guns are going to be ‘banned’ and ‘confiscated’ as some nefarious plot to usher in a ‘totalitarian state.’
> 
> That’s why there’s no ‘need’ for an AR 15; there are other firearms far superior for effective self-defense.


NOT Trumptards "self-defense".
They never learned how to shoot, so they NEED 60 rounds to wound a turtle.
That makes them dangerous.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 17, 2022)

Flash said:


> I have many things that I want, rather than need.
> 
> However I "need" an AR15 for three reasons:
> 
> ...


Only an idiot would use an AR or AK for self defense.
Ever hear of a pistol?
You would get shot dead or wounded by one before you got the AR above your bellybutton.


Flash said:


> 3.  I "need" it for the "security of a free state", as stated in the Constitution.


No, you don't.
If they need you, call you up, they will give/loan you a weapon to use.


Flash said:


> If you don't need or want one then don't buy one.  Nobody gives a shit.  Just keep your nose out of my business, especially my Constitutional rights.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Jul 17, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


What do they even need a reason for ?
Why am I not allowed to own brand spanking new factory freshb fully automatic military grade weaponry ?

My civil rights have been trampled


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 17, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Only an idiot would use an AR or AK for self defense.
> Ever hear of a pistol?
> You would get shot dead or wounded by one before you got the AR above your bellybutton.
> 
> ...


The best weapon for self defense is the one you have and can shoot accurately.

It doesn't really matter if that is a rifle, a shotgun or a handgun.

Most defensive gun uses don't result in the firing of the gun at all.  It's the threat of force that deescalates the situation


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Jul 17, 2022)

That you need someone to justify to you why they need any weapon they want is retarded and ridiculous 
Roflmao

Bfytw


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 17, 2022)

Deplorable Yankee said:


> That you need someone to justify to you why they need any weapon they want is retarded and ridiculous
> Roflmao
> 
> Bfytw


So, a bomb belt to protect yourself shouldn't be questioned?
Booby trapping your house with bombs shouldn't be questioned?
Rigging your vehicle to explode to prevent auto theft?


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> The best weapon for self defense is the one you have and can shoot accurately.


Hard not to be "accurate" with 60 rounds, eventually, you will hit something.


Blues Man said:


> It doesn't really matter if that is a rifle, a shotgun or a handgun.


Depends on the situation, where the attempted crime occurs.


Blues Man said:


> Most defensive gun uses don't result in the firing of the gun at all.  It's the threat of force that deescalates the situation


In most cases.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 17, 2022)

Circe said:


> My husband just signed up for one of those concealed carry classes. His friend got in (it's a circus here, hundreds of people trying to sign up) and somehow got him on the list.
> 
> You are losing, Mr. Irrelevant. There is no use in anyone arguing with people who have lost the argument.


How old is he and how many times in his lifetime he defended himself against armed home invaders and muggers on the street?

Thank goodness I live in the UK, you guys live in fear shitting your pants on a daily basis.

Covert posting is weak.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Jul 17, 2022)

Flash said:


> Certainly like all those BLM and ANTIFA shitheads.


And the Capitol one too.


----------



## Flash (Jul 17, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Only an idiot would use an AR or AK for self defense.
> Ever hear of a pistol?
> You would get shot dead or wounded by one before you got the AR above your bellybutton.
> 
> ...


You are confused Moon Bat.

There are better weapons for self defense depending up on the situation but there are many  instances of an AR being used effectively for self defense.  For instance, a couple of years ago a young pregnant woman here in Central Florida  used an AR to fight off three home invaders.  Ask Kyle Rittenhouse if his AR was effective for self defense.  He sure as hell defeated that asshole that attacked him with a Glock pistol, didn't he?

Our Founding Fathers were like a million times more knowledgeable of what it take to provide for the security of a free state and that is why we have have the individual right to keep and bear arms.  The oppressive government ain't gonna provide you with jackshit if they are the threat to the security of the free state, are they?


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 17, 2022)

Flash said:


> You are confused Moon Bat.
> 
> There are better weapons for self defense depending up on the situation but there are many  instances of an AR being used effectively for self defense.  For instance, a couple of years ago a young pregnant woman here in Central Florida  used an AR to fight off three home invaders.  Ask Kyle Rittenhouse if his AR was effective for self defense.  He sure as hell defeated that asshole that attacked him with a Glock pistol, didn't he?


You're FOS, ALL were unarmed.
Glock pistol?
A fucking skate board you moron.


Flash said:


> Our Founding Fathers were like a million times more knowledgeable of what it take to provide for the security of a free state and that is why we have have the individual right to keep and bear arms.


Yeah, IF you're in a militia.


Flash said:


> The oppressive government ain't gonna provide you with jackshit if they are the threat to the security of the free state, are they?


WTF?
Typical, RWNJ, the US government is the "tyrannical" free state?
So, naturally, they will honor their commitment to let you keep and bear arms?

Doesn't even make sense.


----------



## Flash (Jul 17, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> You're FOS, ALL were unarmed.
> Glock pistol?
> A fucking skate board you moron.
> 
> ...


You are confused Moon Bat.

The Supreme Court says that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right not connected to membership in any organization, including a militia.  I shit you not.  Go read _Heller_ if you are confused.

Not only are you ignorant of the Constitution but you are also  very ignorant of History, aren't you Moon Bat?  There are numerous examples of government being oppressive to the people.

You are really confused about Rittenhouse.  Gaige Grosskreutz admitted in court that he had pointed his Glock pistol at Kyle.

Then we had conclusive video evidence that Anthony Huber attacked Kyle using a heavy skateboard as a club.

Did not CNN or Democratunderground tell you the facts of the case?


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 17, 2022)

Flash said:


> You are confused Moon Bat.


No, you're the one confused.


Flash said:


> The Supreme Court says that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right not connected to membership in any organization, including a militia.  I shit you not.  Go read _Heller_ if you are confused.


They're confused too.
They disregarded half of an amendment.
Of course, Trumptards cling to that.


Flash said:


> Not only are you ignorant of the Constitution but you are also  very ignorant of History, aren't you Moon Bat?  There are numerous examples of government being oppressive to the people.


Really?
Enough where citizen's took up weapons, against the government?
SO, who won?


Flash said:


> You are really confused about Rittenhouse.  Gaige Grosskreutz admitted in court that he had pointed his Glock pistol at Kyle.


In self defense and STILL got shot.


Flash said:


> Then we had conclusive video evidence that Anthony Huber attacked Kyle using a heavy skateboard as a club.
> 
> 
> 
> Did not CNN or Democratunderground tell you the facts of the case?


Still, NOT THE GOVERNMENT.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 17, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Hard not to be "accurate" with 60 rounds, eventually, you will hit something.
> 
> Depends on the situation, where the attempted crime occurs.
> 
> In most cases.


I don't know anyone who owns a 60 round magazine for any of their firearms.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> I don't know anyone who owns a 60 round magazine for any of their firearms.


Two 30's taped together.







ProMag AR-15 / M16 .223 / 5.56 30-Round Magazine​Nothing say's "I can't shoot" on full display.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 17, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Two 30's taped together.
> 
> View attachment 671120
> 
> ...


Uh huh

No one I know ever does that


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 17, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Uh huh
> 
> No one I know ever does that


So, just because you don't, means no one doesn't.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 17, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> So, just because you don't, means no one doesn't.


No one I have ever known does that.

It's just plain stupid and not to mention a pain in the ass


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> You're FOS, ALL were unarmed.
> Glock pistol?
> A fucking skate board you moron.



The second dead felon attacked him with the skateboard.

Lefty had a pistol.


----------



## Concerned American (Jul 20, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.


What is ludicrous is the fact that you feel you are owed a justification or that you feel they should "need" one.  Frankly, it is none of your business why I make any legal purchase of anything.  Maybe you need to keep your nose on your own face and out of other people's business.


----------



## Circe (Jul 20, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> NOT Trumptards "self-defense".
> They never learned how to shoot, so they NEED 60 rounds to wound a turtle.
> That makes them dangerous.


Well, maybe not to turtles ----


----------



## marvin martian (Jul 20, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> But he’s correct about wanting to own an AR 15 to ‘defend against government tyranny’ as being ridiculous nonsense.



Get your fascist hands off my civil rights, nazi.


----------



## Concerned American (Jul 20, 2022)

Seymour Flops said:


> You could make them feel better by explaining to them that AR's are useless when fighting an authoritarian government.


Tell the Afghanis that.  Seems they used semi-auto weapons to their advantage against both the US and Russia.  The Viet Cong could also add to that argument.


----------



## there4eyeM (Jul 21, 2022)

This comparison of fat, lazy, spoiled brats to Taliban and VC never fails to amuse.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 21, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Nope…..the Supreme Court already ruled that just because there are options doesnt allow you idiots to ban types of guns


What part of _“you’re at liberty to possess an AR 15 if you want”_ do you not understand; or are you just too stupid and dishonest to understand.

Own an AR 15 because they’re accurate or reliable or modular, whatever you want – but save the ridiculous lie about ‘needing’ an AR 15; that absent an AR 15 you’re somehow being ‘deprived’ of effective self-defense; because you’re not, it’s a lie.

Possessing an AR 15 is a want, not a ‘need’ – and there’s nothing wrong with that.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 21, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> NOT Trumptards "self-defense".
> They never learned how to shoot, so they NEED 60 rounds to wound a turtle.
> That makes them dangerous.


Trump supporters are dangerous for reasons other than guns – trying to destroy America’s democracy, for starters.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 21, 2022)

Batcat said:


> I personally don’t own a semi-automatic rifle that resembles a military weapon but there may be a time when I do have a reason to own one.
> 
> I live in a rural area of Florida and while there are deer on the property I am not a hunter. If a herd of feral hogs shows up, an AR-15 would be an excellent weapon to eliminate these pests.
> 
> ...


Conservatives lie and fearmonger about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscations’ of guns that will never happen for the same reason conservatives lie and fearmonger about most everything else: keep the base ignorant, angry, and going to the polls.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 21, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Only an idiot would use an AR or AK for self defense.
> Ever hear of a pistol?
> You would get shot dead or wounded by one before you got the AR above your bellybutton.
> 
> ...


Only an idiot would lie that without an AR he’s being ‘deprived’ of effective self-defense.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 21, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> What is ludicrous is the fact that you feel you are owed a justification or that you feel they should "need" one.  Frankly, it is none of your business why I make any legal purchase of anything.  Maybe you need to keep your nose on your own face and out of other people's business.


Wanting an AR is a legitimate reason, albeit personal and subjective. 

The point being there is no ‘need’ to possess an AR 15 – there is no objective, documented evidence in support of the wrongheaded notion that without an AR 15 one is ‘self-defense deprived.’ 

There are ample other – and better – means of self-defense with a firearm; possessing an AR 15 is a want, not a ‘need.’ 

And yet again: that fact there this no need to possess an AR 15 is not to advocate for their prohibition.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 21, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Wanting an AR is a legitimate reason, albeit personal and subjective.
> 
> The point being there is no ‘need’ to possess an AR 15 – there is no objective, documented evidence in support of the wrongheaded notion that without an AR 15 one is ‘self-defense deprived.’
> 
> ...


Show me the word NEED in the bill of rights


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 21, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Only an idiot would lie that without an AR he’s being ‘deprived’ of effective self-defense.


Only an idiot would claim they know what's best for the individual.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 21, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Trump supporters are dangerous for reasons other than guns – trying to destroy America’s democracy, for starters.


They are already changing election laws to do just that.


C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Conservatives lie and fearmonger about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscations’ of guns that will never happen for the same reason conservatives lie and fearmonger about most everything else: keep the base ignorant, angry, and going to the polls.


And buying weapons.

Only an idiot would go out and purchase something they're convinced will be banned/confiscated.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 21, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Only an idiot would claim they know what's best for the individual.


That's true some people only need 5 rounds to go hunting, others need 300.
They spend all that $$$ on all that ammo, instead of learning how to shoot.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 21, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> That's true some people only need 5 rounds to go hunting, others need 300.
> They spend all that $$$ on all that ammo, instead of learning how to shoot.


I don't hunt but I do have a lot of firearms because hunting is not a requirement of the second amendment.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 21, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> They are already changing election laws to do just that.
> 
> And buying weapons.
> 
> Only an idiot would go out and purchase something they're convinced will be banned/confiscated.


Democrats did change the election laws of their state in 2020 some did it without authorization


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 21, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> I don't hunt but I do have a lot of firearms because hunting is not a requirement of the second amendment.


It was when it was written.
They didn't have takeout.

Don't hunt but have plenty of weapons?

You would be the person in my neighborhood that a watch who be established.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 21, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> What part of _“you’re at liberty to possess an AR 15 if you want”_ do you not understand; or are you just too stupid and dishonest to understand.
> 
> Own an AR 15 because they’re accurate or reliable or modular, whatever you want – but save the ridiculous lie about ‘needing’ an AR 15; that absent an AR 15 you’re somehow being ‘deprived’ of effective self-defense; because you’re not, it’s a lie.
> 
> Possessing an AR 15 is a want, not a ‘need’ – and there’s nothing wrong with that.




Nope......if they can ban the AR-15 rifle, they can ban any rifle.......we need a rifle like the AR-15 to defend against people like you who take control of a government.....15 million dead Europeans teach us this...as well as the rest of human history and human nature.........

The AR-15 is now a symbol of freedom....because if they can grab the AR-15 rifle on the basis that we don't "need" a rifle like that.....there is no argument against not needing any other rifle like that...


----------



## Batcat (Jul 21, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Conservatives lie and fearmonger about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscations’ of guns that will never happen for the same reason conservatives lie and fearmonger about most everything else: keep the base ignorant, angry, and going to the polls.


The bans will not happen because people want to have the right to buy commonly used firearms for self defense.

Defunding the police in many blue cities has led to a significant increase in violent crime. Police departments now are undermanned and the cops have turned reactive rather than proactive. People in those cities now realize they can’t rely on the police to arrive and save the day. Therefore in the last year we have had a large increase in first time gun owners.









						NSSF Retailer Surveys Indicate 5.4 Million First-Time Gun Buyers in 2021
					

NSSF revealed that at least 5.4 million people purchased a firearm for the first time in 2021.




					www.nssf.org
				












						Black Gun Ownership Up 58.2%, Most Don't Want to Defund the Police
					

Though the mainstream media paints a picture of racist white gun owners, Black gun ownership is actually increasing, while most don't want to defund police.




					www.personaldefenseworld.com


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 21, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> They are already changing election laws to do just that.
> 
> And buying weapons.
> 
> Only an idiot would go out and purchase something they're convinced will be banned/confiscated.


Only an idiot would lie about 'needing' an AR 15.


----------



## hadit (Jul 21, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


No one thinks a mob of people armed with AR-15s is going to stop the full might of the US military, that's not the point. The point is, when tens of millions of private citizens are in possession of hundreds of millions of firearms, they can make the cost of tyranny very high indeed, and when the cost of tyranny becomes too high, those who would wish to impose it do not.


----------



## Concerned American (Jul 21, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Possessing an AR 15 is a want, not a ‘need’


IRRELEVANT.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 21, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> It was when it was written.
> They didn't have takeout.
> 
> Don't hunt but have plenty of weapons?
> ...


No it has never been


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 21, 2022)

lg325 said:


> It's just an ugly deer rifle when comes right down to it.  People who are not familiar with firearms go by the way it looks instead of what it is.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It sucks as a dear rifle. Only People who are not familiar with firearms think they are.


----------



## Concerned American (Jul 21, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Conservatives lie and fearmonger about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscations’ of guns that will never happen for the same reason conservatives lie and fearmonger about most everything else: keep the base ignorant, angry, and going to the polls.


Kind of like democrats that want to justify the murder of innocents, eh?  Let's not be hypocritical.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> No it has never been


Really?
So, no one hunted, not even the Indians.
Thank god for takeout...................next to the airports.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Really?
> So, no one hunted, not even the Indians.
> Thank god for takeout...................next to the airports.


No the second amendment has never been about hunting


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> No the second amendment has never been about hunting


It was about maintaining a militia.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> It was about maintaining a militia.


The government doesn't have a second amendment right.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> IRRELEVANT.


No where is need a requirement for a right.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The government doesn't have a second amendment right.


Really?
They sure use them a lot.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Really?
> They sure use them a lot.


You're an idiot. The government does not have a second amendment right. The bill of rights wasn't written for the government.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 22, 2022)

hadit said:


> No one thinks a mob of people armed with AR-15s is going to stop the full might of the US military, that's not the point. The point is, when tens of millions of private citizens are in possession of hundreds of millions of firearms, they can make the cost of tyranny very high indeed, and when the cost of tyranny becomes too high, those who would wish to impose it do not.


_“Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one.”_

It is simple – and there’s nothing wrong with wanting to possess an AR 15; it’s dishonest and a lie to claim one ‘needs’ an AR 15.

And it isn’t necessary to lie about ‘needing’ and AR 15 to advance a dishonest, baseless argument against ‘banning’ AR 15s.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> You're an idiot. The government does not have a second amendment right. The bill of rights wasn't written for the government.


YES, it was you moron.
George Washington was part of the Virginia militia.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Really?
> They sure use them a lot.


The government has no rights that are not given to it by the people.

THE PEOPLE have rights and our entire governmental philosophy is based on the premise that rights are not given to the people but are inherent in each person.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> The government has no rights that are not given to it by the people.
> 
> THE PEOPLE have rights and our entire governmental philosophy is based on the premise that rights are not given to the people but are inherent in each person.


Sure, "A philosophy" isn't reality.
No, rights are inalienable nor inherent.

The American Indians or black slaves never had these rights, until they were given by the government.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Sure, "A philosophy" isn't reality.
> No, rights are inalienable nor inherent.
> 
> The American Indians or black slaves never had these rights, until they were given by the government.


And yet our entire system of government is based on that premise

And the government didn;t give those people rights they just stopped others from violating their rights.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 22, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Get your fascist hands off my civil rights, nazi.


AR 15s are accurate, reliable, and modular – tons of aftermarket stuff, mix-and-match complete uppers and lowers, build your own; it’s Barbie for men, who wouldn’t want one.

But nobody ‘needs' one, particularly to ‘defend against government tyranny,’ which is in fact ridiculous nonsense.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> And yet our entire system of government is based on that premise


Rights and amendments comprising of the CONSTITUTION.


Blues Man said:


> And the government didn;t give those people rights they just stopped others from violating their rights.


You're FOS, idiot.

*Passed by Congress June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th amendment granted women the right to vote.*

The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, signed into law by President Calvin Coolidge on June 2, 1924, granted U.S. citizenship to all Native American Indians.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 22, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> _“Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one.”_
> 
> It is simple – and there’s nothing wrong with wanting to possess an AR 15; it’s dishonest and a lie to claim one ‘needs’ an AR 15.
> 
> And it isn’t necessary to lie about ‘needing’ and AR 15 to advance a dishonest, baseless argument against ‘banning’ AR 15s.



I need an AR-15 for threats where other choices are the wrong one…..for the job at hand.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> YES, it was you moron.
> George Washington was part of the Virginia militia.


What the fuck kind of dodge was that? George Washington wasn't the government. The government does not have any Constitutionally protected rights. The bill of rights are for the protection of rights from the government.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> I need an AR-15 for threats where other choices are the wrong one…..for the job at hand.


Need is not a requirement. You have a right to an AR 15 for threats..............


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> It doesn't matter they signed the certificate.
> Most of them were PART of the general assembly................TRAITORS.


Yes it matters


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> _“Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one.”_
> 
> It is simple – and there’s nothing wrong with wanting to possess an AR 15; it’s dishonest and a lie to claim one ‘needs’ an AR 15.
> 
> And it isn’t necessary to lie about ‘needing’ and AR 15 to advance a dishonest, baseless argument against ‘banning’ AR 15s.


Irony is when you a liar calls someone else a liar.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Really?
> They sure use them a lot.


No the government doesn't have any rights. The bill of rights are for the protection of rights from the government.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> Rights and amendments comprising of the CONSTITUTION.
> 
> You're FOS, idiot.
> 
> ...


You need to read the text of the Amendment idiot.

The 19th

_*The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.*_
*Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.[1]*

The 19th did not grant any rights it stopped the denial of rights to women.

And Indian Citizenship act did not grant any rights since citizenship is not a right it is a legal designation


----------



## Peace (Jul 22, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


The only justification to own one is wanting one and any other reason matter not unless you can prove the possible sale is a future mass shooting.

I have said it before the AR-15 could be listed in the same group as the Uzi which would mean you can own one if you meet the requirements to obtain one which then would limit who could buy one seeing the requirements are much higher.

Now you wanting a reason why someone would buy one is none of your business unless the State can prove the individual buying the firearm is a possible threat or has a criminal record but any other reason is none of your concern and asking a question like you or the writer is asking is infringing on someone personal life.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Peace said:


> The only justification to own one is wanting one and any other reason matter not unless you can prove the possible sale is a future mass shooting.
> 
> I have said it before the AR-15 could be listed in the same group as the Uzi which would mean you can own one if you meet the requirements to obtain one which then would limit who could buy one seeing the requirements are much higher.
> 
> Now you wanting a reason why someone would buy one is none of your business unless the State can prove the individual buying the firearm is a possible threat or has a criminal record but any other reason is none of your concern and asking a question like you or the writer is asking is infringing on someone personal life.


The Uzi is a fully automatic weapon the AR 15 is a commonplace semiautomatic rifle and semiautomatic rifles have been legal for civilian use since their inception over 100 years ago


----------



## Peace (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> The Uzi is a fully automatic weapon the AR 15 is a commonplace semiautomatic rifle and semiautomatic rifles have been legal for civilian use since their inception over 100 years ago


Still can be added to the list if Congress deems that it belongs there…

You have the right to own a firearm but the Government can tell you what you can and can not buy!

Uzi and Tommy Gun are clear cut examples!


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Peace said:


> Still can be added to the list of Congress deems that it belongs there…
> 
> You have the right to own a firearm but the Government can tell you what you can and can not buy!
> 
> Uzi and Tommy Gun are clear cut examples!


No it can't.

And fully automatic weapons are still legal you just have to pay an extra tax.  And Uzis and Tommy guns are FULLY AUTOMATIC.  It is a very clear distinction 

If you require different rules for one particular semiauto then all semiauto ownership is at risk.

The AR 15 is no different that any other semiautomatic rifle.  it is not more powerful than any other rifle that is chambered for the same round.  It is not more accurate , it does not have a faster rate of fire.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


Total lying bullshit, like always.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Peace said:


> Still can be added to the list if Congress deems that it belongs there…
> 
> You have the right to own a firearm but the Government can tell you what you can and can not buy!
> 
> Uzi and Tommy Gun are clear cut examples!


Gun banning commie.


----------



## Peace (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> No it can't.
> 
> And fully automatic weapons are still legal you just have to pay an extra tax.  And Uzis and Tommy guns are FULLY AUTOMATIC.  It is a very clear distinction
> 
> ...


They can be added to a list and you just admitted they can, so yes they can!

Fact is the Government can limit what you buy as a firearm which I have stated not once but a few damn times you f’ing moron!

You just wrote what I wrote in my original post about the Uzi and how you have added requirements, so this can also be done to the AR-15 and any firearm and truthfully it isn’t infringing on your right to own a firearm but what it does is limit your right of what type!

Got it?

Of course not because you will then scream second amendment and I will point to the Uzi and Tommy Gun again and how they were legal at one time and then added to a list that made it much harder to obtain…

Got it now?

Bet you don’t seeing you are a simple minded fool!


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> I need an AR-15 for threats where other choices are the wrong one…..for the job at hand.


Like hitting a barn door, at 15 paces?


----------



## Peace (Jul 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> I need an AR-15 for threats where other choices are the wrong one…..for the job at hand.


Then you are a bad shot… Use a shotgun if you lack the ability to hit your target…


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Peace said:


> They can be added to a list and you just admitted they can, so yes they can!
> 
> Fact is the Government can limit what you buy as a firearm which I have stated not once but a few damn times you f’ing moron!
> 
> ...


I never admitted any such thing.

and you do not seem to understand that fully automatic weapons are not illegal.

And the regulations apply to ALL fully automatic weapons.

If you want a regulation for one particular semiautomatic rifle then it has to be applied to ALL semiautomatic rifles


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> What the fuck kind of dodge was that? George Washington wasn't the government.


YES, he was, you moron.
He was part of the Virginia militia, that's the government.
Holy crap, you know less than Trump about government, civics or US history.


bigrebnc1775 said:


> The government does not have any Constitutionally protected rights. The bill of rights are for the protection of rights from the government.


The people ARE the government.
They don't have any rights?
You're FOS, but they likely just glazed over that, they do that with the "special" kids.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> No the second amendment has never been about hunting


Yup. We accepted that everyone wanted to “eat”. But the constitution recognized this fact. Defense using unreliable black powder firearms, could only be accomplished with a Militia. It was a call to arms in a draft.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> You need to read the text of the Amendment idiot.


I did, you moron.


Blues Man said:


> The 19th
> 
> _*The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.*_
> *Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.[1]*
> ...


That's granting them rights, you idiot.
If women didn't have the right to vote, that means they weren't allowed to vote.
When did they have a right to vote before 1869?
They didn't.



Blues Man said:


> And Indian Citizenship act did not grant any rights since citizenship is not a right it is a legal designation


WTF?
So, the US government can revoke an American Indian's citizenship?

Are ALL teabaggers self-proclaimed "genius' like Trump?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> The Uzi is a fully automatic weapon the AR 15 is a commonplace semiautomatic rifle and semiautomatic rifles have been legal for civilian use since their inception over 100 years ago


The Uzi is also available in semi auto. It was designed for military use. The AR15 is not common place semi auto rifle. The .223 caliber cartridges and AR15 were specifically designEd as a MILITARY, full auto, low recoil round for the original AR15 which WAS full auto. Only after Colt bought the rights did the AR15 full auto get renamed as an m16, and the AR15 was then shifted into the semi auto version only.

Those in the military who trained with the AR15
/M16 trained 99% of the time with select fire on semi auto.
On semi auto, it is still a military firearm.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> The Uzi is also available in semi auto. It was designed for military use. The AR15 is not common place semi auto rifle. The .223 caliber cartridges and AR15 were specifically designEd as a MILITARY, full auto, low recoil round for the original AR15 which WAS full auto. Only after Colt bought the rights did the AR15 full auto get renamed as an m16, and the AR15 was then shifted into the semi auto version only.
> 
> Those in the military who trained with the AR15
> /M16 trained 99% of the time with select fire on semi auto.
> On semi auto, it is still a military firearm.



The 7.62 and 6.6 mm rounds were also used by the military but you don't seen to care about those more powerful rounds

The term military firearm is pretty meaningless since almost every firearm that ever existed was at one time used by some military organization.

Usually at least for people who know anything about firearms a military rifle is considered to be a rifle capable of both semiauto AND full auto fire the round used is irrelevant


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> FYI Idiot I didn't vote for Trump but since you are an intellectual midget you cannot think in more than 2 dimensions.


You're FOS, you defend the lying, moron, bet you didn't vote for Bush either............LOL.


Blues Man said:


> And again Granted CITIZENSHIP by recognizing that Indians were BORN in the US.  Citizenship is not necessary for any other right except the right to vote.


WTF?
Doubling down on stupid?
American Indians have the same rights as any citizen in the US.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> You're FOS, you defend the lying, moron, bet you didn't vote for Bush either............LOL.
> 
> WTF?
> Doubling down on stupid?
> American Indians have the same rights as any citizen in the US.


OK quote ANY post of mine where I defended Trump

When you can't do that will you have the integrity to admit you are a LYING SACK OF SHIT?

I doubt it


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> You're FOS, you defend the lying, moron, bet you didn't vote for Bush either............LOL.
> 
> WTF?
> Doubling down on stupid?
> American Indians have the same rights as any citizen in the US.


when you can't dazzle them with brilliance...


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> The 7.62 and 6.6 mm rounds were also used by the military but you don't seen to care about those more powerful rounds
> 
> The term military firearm is pretty meaningless since almost every firearm that ever existed was at one time used by some military organization.
> 
> Usually at least for people who know anything about firearms a military rifle is considered to be a rifle capable of both semiauto AND full auto fire the round used is irrelevant


Wrong about that…..The vast majority if designed use for ALL military rifles, including the modern versions, are first and foremost designed to be used as semi auto firearms. 
You need to have served to understand that. 

You don’t know your firearm history. The .223 and even 9 mm decades ago, we’re specifically designed for military weapons. They each have the same protocol of minimum recoil, maximum fire power with sufficient energy to kill PEOPLE. That each can be used to hunt with is only a less apt secondary use. There are a plethora of better rounds in a rifles then .223 for hunting like better rounds for hunting with a handgun then 9 mm.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> OK quote ANY post of mine where I defended Trump
> 
> When you can't do that will you have the integrity to admit you are a LYING SACK OF SHIT?
> 
> I doubt it


That's all any of them are. I doubt they are Americans.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Wrong about that…..The vast majority if designed use for ALL military rifles, including the modern versions, are first and foremost designed to be used as semi auto firearms.
> You need to have served to understand that.
> 
> You don’t know your firearm history. The .223 and even 9 mm decades ago, we’re specifically designed for military weapons. They each have the same protocol of minimum recoil, maximum fire power with sufficient energy to kill PEOPLE. That each can be used to hunt with is only a less apt secondary use. There are a plethora of better rounds in a rifles then .223 for hunting like better rounds for hunting with a handgun then 9 mm.


Why are you promoting violence?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Santa's helper?


I can read….see spot run.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Wrong about that…..The vast majority if designed use for ALL military rifles, including the modern versions, are first and foremost designed to be used as semi auto firearms.
> You need to have served to understand that.
> 
> You don’t know your firearm history. The .223 and even 9 mm decades ago, we’re specifically designed for military weapons. They each have the same protocol of minimum recoil, maximum fire power with sufficient energy to kill PEOPLE. That each can be used to hunt with is only a less apt secondary use. There are a plethora of better rounds in a rifles then .223 for hunting like better rounds for hunting with a handgun then 9 mm.



It doesn't fucking matter.  The 5.56 round is nothing but an old .222 with more gunpowder in the shell

The US used both the 7.62 AND the 6.8 mm rounds at one time.

They decided to go with a LESS POWERFUL round and sacrificed power for the ability of soldiers to carry more ammo.

And IDGAF if a 223 isn't a good deer hunting round.  It is a perfectly good round varmints and small game AND is good enough for home defense

I have a mini 14 that is chambered for .223 rounds but you don't want to ban that even though it is functionally no different than an AR 15.

I have  rifles chambered for both 7.62 and 6.8 mm n but you don't care about those rounds even though they are more powerful and have both been used by the military.

In fact the 5.56 round looks like it's going to be replaced by the military most likely with either the 7.62 or 6.8


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> I can read….see spot run.


You can choke too.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Why are you promoting violence?


I’m promoting accurate information that you don’t seem to have. The military non supportive role is to serve the country in a role that absolutely no other “ occupation” does. It necessarily involves taking persons lives as a primary focus  and breaking things. Geesus, I hope even everyday citizens or even the police, even in self defense don’t look at firearms the same way.

The AR15 and hi cap 9mm firearms all should be MORE highly regulated then they are.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> I’m promoting accurate information that you don’t seem to have. The military non supportive role is to serve the country in a role that absolutely no other “ occupation” does. It necessarily involves taking persons lives as a primary focus  and breaking things. Geesus, I hope even everyday citizens or even the police, even in self defense don’t look at firearms the same way.
> 
> The AR15 and hi cap 9mm firearms all should be MORE highly regulated then they are.


Why don't you gun banners ever talk about all the other guns that do the same thing an AR-15 can do? Cat got your tongue about them? Or more likely one of them will be on your next one to ban list.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> doesn't fucking matter. The 5.56 round is nothing but an old .222 with more gunpowder in the shell


Geesus, then IT ISN'T THE SAME ROUND. Really, you sound less educated. You aren’t one of these people who thinks just  because a slug has the same diameter, the entire family of rounds are the same ?
The .222 is not a primary semi auto round. 
The .223 is specifically designed to cycle a military semi auto/ auto rifle. A .222 is not.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Geesus, then IT ISN'T THE SAME ROUND. Really, you sound less educated. You aren’t one of these people who thinks just  because a slug has the same diameter, the entire family of rounds are the same ?
> The .222 is not a primary semi auto round.
> The .223 is specifically designed to cycle a military semi auto/ auto rifle. A .222 is not.


You can hear him? Weird...


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Geesus, then IT ISN'T THE SAME ROUND. Really, you sound less educated. You aren’t one of these people who thinks just  because a slug has the same diameter, the entire family of rounds are the same ?
> The .222 is not a primary semi auto round.
> The .223 is specifically designed to cycle a military semi auto/ auto rifle. A .222 is not.


Any round can be used in a semiautomatic rifle that is chambered for the round.

Moron

Shit every 12 year old in my neighborhood has a .22 semiauto rifle and it doesn't need any special round designed for a semiauto rifle.  any old .22 long will work.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Why don't you gun banners ever talk about all the other guns that do the same thing an AR-15 can do? Cat got your tongue about them? Or more likely one of them will be on your next one to ban list.


 Because illiterate, the lethality of the cartridge in .223 with limited recoil is just as important to defining the AR15 as the features it has. The AR15 platform in .308 is. is no where near as plentiful on the civilian market for one reason……think of it.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> You can hear him? Weird...


Way over your head isn’t it.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Because illiterate, the lethality of the cartridge in .223 with limited recoil is just as important to defining the AR15 as the features it has. The AR15 platform in .308 is. is no where near as plentiful on the civilian market for one reason……think of it.


Gee maybe it has something to do with the popularity of rifles chambered for 5.56 rounds as compared to rifles chambered for .308

DUH


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 22, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


Who are you to judge why a person wants an AR-15? Why does their reason of just wanting one not good enough for you? What special rights do you have to make your narrowminded judgement call?  Owning a weapon is a right, and your hate and bigotry is just a show of your intolerance to others.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Any round can be used in a semiautomatic rifle that is chambered for the round.
> 
> Moron
> 
> Shit every 12 year old in my neighborhood has a .22 semiauto rifle and it doesn't need any special round designed for a semiauto rifle.  any old .22 long will work.


12 year old ? Where did that come from ?You’re a confused little puppy. A .222 round or cartridge is not the same as a .223 round. Neither is it the same as a .22 round which travels as much as 2000 ft per second less.
You seem not to understand a round includes both the bullet and the casing and primer You’re all over the place.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Gee maybe it has something to do with the popularity of rifles chambered for 5.56 rounds as compared to rifles chambered for .308
> 
> DUH


Dah, it has to do with two things cost/ availability and recoil.

Try staying on target……..223 is more popular because it’s one of the few military calibers that military toy soldier wannabes can handle.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Because illiterate, the lethality of the cartridge in .223 with limited recoil is just as important to defining the AR15 as the features it has. The AR15 platform in .308 is. is no where near as plentiful on the civilian market for one reason……think of it.


Lol, what a non reply. Good gun banner! So why don't you gun banners ever talk about all the other rifles that do the same thing an ar does?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

Papageorgio said:


> Who are you to judge why a person wants an AR-15? Why does their reason of just wanting one not good enough for you? What special rights do you have to make your narrowminded judgement call?  Owning a weapon is a right, and your hate and bigotry is just a show of your intolerance to others.


That same line of reasoning is why full autos are regulated as they are. Just because they are “ fun to shoot” doesn’t mean everyone not qualified should have one.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Lol, what a non reply. Good gun banner! So why don't you gun banners ever talk about all the other rifles that do the same thing an ar does?


Because foolish, there are ver few other rifles then the AR15 platform in .223 that will do the same. Other semi autos like a Ruger mini in .223 WILL. They should be treated the same.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> That same line of reasoning is why full autos are regulated as they are. Just because they are “ fun to shoot” doesn’t mean everyone not qualified should have one.


Gun banner, what "qualifications" are there, since keeping arms is our right?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Gun banner, what "qualifications" are there, since keeping arms is our right?


QUALIFIED right. If you don’t qualify, you don’t have the right.  The same with all the bill of rights. That’s what the SC says. Your opinion is FOS. Read Heller….


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Because foolish, there are ver few other rifles then the AR15 platform in .223 that will do the same. Other semi autos like a Ruger mini in .223 WILL. *They should be treated the same.*


There it is! They should all be banned! Thanks for finally admitting it!  Come get my semi  auto, gun banner!


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> QUALIFIED right. If you don’t qualify, you don’t have the right.  The same with all the bill of rights. That’s what the SC says. Your opinion is FOS. Read Heller….


Gun banner, what "qualifications" are there? Lol. This commie turds wants the guns don't you.? Come get them!


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> There it is! They should all be banned! Thanks for finally admitting it!  Come get my semi  auto, gun banner!


No, you should be banned from possessing a firearm. I support you being illiterate should disqualify you.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Gun banner, what "qualifications" are there? Lol. This commie turds wants the guns don't you.? Come get them!


Just yours, illiterate.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Gun banner, what "qualifications" are there? Lol. This commie turds wants the guns don't you.? Come get them!


Well, the first thing is, literacy. So much for gun a holics.
Also, you act like an 8 year old so your age should disqualify you. You want to sell guns to felons….


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> No, you should be banned from possessing a firearm. I support you being illiterate should disqualify you.


Well come get them commie! Lol, you scum always show your colors don't you?  Anyone notice  this gun banner won't say what his so called "qualifications"are? The method is always the same with you traitors. You gonna get mad and shoot up a school now?


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Just yours, illiterate.


No you commies won't stop there.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)




----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)




----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)




----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)




----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)




----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

I guess the gun banner don't wanna talk about the rifles whose images I just posted? Just a few...


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Hey Mikee! Don't forget me! I take ak mags!


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> That same line of reasoning is why full autos are regulated as they are. Just because they are “ fun to shoot” doesn’t mean everyone not qualified should have one.


Again, answer us why it is your business what a person owns or the reason they want to own anything legal? 

That is the issue I have with the Democrats and Republicans, they believe they have a right to make decisions for you, they don't, and you don't. Mind your own business, you are not and do not need to be in control of others and giving or taking away their rights.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Hey Mikee! Don't forget me! I take ak mags!
> 
> View attachment 673225


That ain't nothing boy! I take 50 round mags!!!!


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

Papageorgio said:


> Again, answer us why it is your business what a person owns or the reason they want to own anything legal?
> 
> That is the issue I have with the Democrats and Republicans, they believe they have a right to make decisions for you, they don't, and you don't. Mind your own business, you are not and do not need to be in control of others and giving or taking away their rights.


They are not your rights unless you qualify. A-holes don’t have first amendment rights in public places.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Hey Mikee! Don't forget me! I take ak mags!
> 
> View attachment 673225




See...I think that rifle looks better than an AR-15 does.......If they could make that in an accessory friendly version, I would prefer that to the AR-15 look...


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Hey Mikee! Don't forget me! I take ak mags!
> 
> View attachment 673225


That gun shoots both ways. Must give bisexual gun a holics a real hard on.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> See...I think that rifle looks better than an AR-15 does.......If they could make that in an accessory friendly version, I would prefer that to the AR-15 look...


Yeah, I like ak's better.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> No you commies won't stop there.


Not as far as your illiteracy is concerned.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> That ain't nothing boy! I take 50 round mags!!!!
> 
> 
> View attachment 673230


Always figured you guys needed pictures to communicate.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Not as far as your illiteracy is concerned.


Lol, commie talks in circles! Or maybe squares, who knows?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Lol, commie talks in circles! Or maybe squares, who knows?


The printed word must scare the fk out of Humpers.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> They are not your rights unless you qualify. A-holes don’t have first amendment rights in public places.


So, you aren't allowed in public?

 And you are mixed up, they are your rights unless you do something illegal and then you can lose those rights and you have no say whatsoever over anyone else and what they choose in life.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Always figured you guys needed pictures to communicate.


Lol, gun banner gets beaten and then all it can go is spew nonsense. Classic and expected leftist schtick!


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> The Uzi is also available in semi auto. It was designed for military use. The AR15 is not common place semi auto rifle. The .223 caliber cartridges and AR15 were specifically designEd as a MILITARY, full auto, low recoil round for the original AR15 which WAS full auto. Only after Colt bought the rights did the AR15 full auto get renamed as an m16, and the AR15 was then shifted into the semi auto version only.
> 
> Those in the military who trained with the AR15
> /M16 trained 99% of the time with select fire on semi auto.
> On semi auto, it is still a military firearm.





Yeah....this....


*The FOIA request itself was prompted from a Nov. 2017 article in The Atlantic in which the magazine, unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with its anti-gun bent, attempted to bolster a claim that “these rifles were meant for the military, not civilians.”*

*“Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963. *

*It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the ‘Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle’ began on Jan 2, 1964,” one critic of the article contended.
*
*“The M16 wasn’t issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn’t standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn’t officially replace the M14 until 1969.”*

Original ATF AR-15 Classification Refutes Claim that Rifle ‘Not Meant’ for Civilians


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> The printed word must scare the fk out of Humpers.


Lol, gun banner keeps on spewing stupid! C'mon gun banner, why don't you wanna talk about those other guns?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Lol, gun banner keeps on spewing stupid! C'mon gun banner, why don't you wanna talk about those other guns?


Too many words would scare the fk out of holics.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Too many words would scare the fk out of holics.


Lol gun banner can't refute it so he spews stupid like all traitors!


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Lol gun banner can't refute it so he spews stupid like all traitors!


Traitor to whom ? Right wing  terrorism is the biggest terrorist threat to our country. They’re your buds.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Traitor to whom ? Right wing  terrorism is the biggest terrorist threat to our country. They’re your buds.








Come get me gun banner! I ain't no pissy little ar!


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Hey gun banner! If I'm so illiterate, how come I can read you so well?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> View attachment 673234
> 
> Come get me gun banner! I ain't no pissy little ar!


I’m not impressed by how bid you think your Dick is by the pictures of “guns” you display. It’s an illusion.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> I’m not impressed by how bid you think your Dick is by the pictures of “guns” you display. It’s an illusion.


Oh my, the gun banner goes from nonsense to dick talk! Lol! Poor little commie is out in the open! Still won't answer the question! Now, will he pretend not to know what the question is?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Oh my, the gun banner goes from nonsense to dick talk! Lol! Poor little commie is out in the open! Still won't answer the question! Now, will he pretend not to know what the question is?


You’re the “fagot” hound. I have no idea what delusional gotcha question “you think your entitled to.“


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> You’re the “fagot” hound. I have no idea what delusional gotcha question “you think your entitled to.“


Classic leftist denial babble! Look! He has no idea! Go away ya lying commie gun banner!


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Classic leftist denial babble! Look! He has no idea! Go away ya lying commie gun banner!


Heard nothing even close to a literacy.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Heard nothing even close to a literacy.


The little commie keeps lying, but still won't answer the question. Well gun banner, you lose again.


----------



## hadit (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> The Uzi is also available in semi auto. It was designed for military use. The AR15 is not common place semi auto rifle. The .223 caliber cartridges and AR15 were specifically designEd as a MILITARY, full auto, low recoil round for the original AR15 which WAS full auto. Only after Colt bought the rights did the AR15 full auto get renamed as an m16, and the AR15 was then shifted into the semi auto version only.
> 
> Those in the military who trained with the AR15
> /M16 trained 99% of the time with select fire on semi auto.
> On semi auto, it is still a military firearm.


Correction, the AR-15 was designed first as a civilian weapon, and only later re-designed for military use. Pesky little detail, I know, but important if you want to sound like you know things.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

hadit said:


> Correction, the AR-15 was designed first as a civilian weapon, and only later re-designed for military use. Pesky little detail, I know, but important if you want to sound like you know things.


I already showed him to be a lying gun banner. Thanks.


----------



## Lastamender (Jul 22, 2022)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Here’s the reason people tell me they want to buy an AR-15.​
> Because.....fuck you!!!


How many people do you think ask that ass clown anything? 0 to none?


----------



## hadit (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> I’m not impressed by how bid you think your Dick is by the pictures of “guns” you display. It’s an illusion.


And there's that mind reading trick again.


----------



## hadit (Jul 22, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


Since no one has to give a reason why they want an AR-15, our opinions about why they say they want one are irrelevant.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> OK quote ANY post of mine where I defended Trump
> 
> When you can't do that will you have the integrity to admit you are a LYING SACK OF SHIT?
> 
> I doubt it


All that gun banner commie does is lie.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> I’m not impressed by how bid you think your Dick is by the pictures of “guns” you display. It’s an illusion.


If that were true, Mr dick talk. I never would have bought a gun with a 2 inch barrel!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

Peace said:


> Still can be added to the list if Congress deems that it belongs there…
> 
> You have the right to own a firearm but the Government can tell you what you can and can not buy!
> 
> Uzi and Tommy Gun are clear cut examples!


In common use means it's protected by the bill of rights and the owner of said AR 15. Case closed.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> I did, you moron.
> 
> That's granting them rights, you idiot.
> If women didn't have the right to vote, that means they weren't allowed to vote.
> ...


Being a teabagger is a lot better than being the recipient of said tea bagging such as yourself.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> View attachment 673234
> 
> Come get me gun banner! I ain't no pissy little ar!


A definite internet tough guy.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> A definite internet tough guy.


Sez the stupid gun banner. That statement your lying ass quoted was the gun talking. Yeah, I know guns can't really talk. Buffoon.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> In common use means it's protected by the bill of rights and the owner of said AR 15. Case closed.


Not in California. Connecticut. Delaware. Maryland. Massachusetts. New Hampshire. New Jersey. New York.
So like hell they’re protected by the BOR. No challenges, no overturns. No fking way. Case closed.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Sez the stupid gun banner. That statement your lying ass quoted was the gun talking. Yeah, I know guns can't really talk. Buffoon.


I have that idiot on ignore must be a Jake Starkey soc.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

hadit said:


> Correction, the AR-15 was designed first as a civilian weapon, and only later re-designed for military use. Pesky little detail, I know, but important if you want to sound like you know things.


That’s wrong. Read the history. Armorlite originally  designed the FIRST AR15 with select fire not for civilians.   Now apologize again for being less informed. You guys are so predictably ignorant.
The AR-15 had its humble beginnings in the 1950s, when it was developed by Eugene Stoner for military use.
it was capable of select fire.  Not intended initially as a civilian weapon


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> If that were true, Mr dick talk. I never would have bought a gun with a 2 inch barrel!


He is over compensating. 😆


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Sez the stupid gun banner. That statement your lying ass quoted was the gun talking. Yeah, I know guns can't really talk. Buffoon.


Bow wow.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

miketx said:


> Sez the stupid gun banner. That statement your lying ass quoted was the gun talking. Yeah, I know guns can't really talk. Buffoon.


Of course, you can’t quote one lie I’ve ever said, other then if I said you’re straight.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> He is over compensating. 😆


And you’re under performing….typical.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 22, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> He is over compensating. 😆


I’m not the one who feels a need to have a gun for show.


----------



## miketx (Jul 22, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Of course, you can’t quote one lie I’ve ever said, other then if I said you’re straight.


Shut the hell up ya lying traitor gun banner. Spew your babble clap trap somewhere else!


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 23, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Being a teabagger is a lot better than being the recipient of said tea bagging such as yourself.


These people look happy stupid but happy. 
I wouldn't waste my teabags.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

hadit said:


> Correction, the AR-15 was designed first as a civilian weapon, and only later re-designed for military use. Pesky little detail, I know, but important if you want to sound like you know things.


How can you persist on being wrong


hadit said:


> Correction, the AR-15 was designed first as a civilian weapon, and only later re-designed for military use. Pesky little detail, I know, but important if you want to sound like you know things.


​You are wrong, as usual. A gun a holic   on an AR15 thread and doesn’t have a clue.​​ArmaLite AR-15​
The *ArmaLite AR-15*[note 2] is a select-fire,[note 1] gas-operated, air-cooled, magazine-fedrifle manufactured in the United States between 1959 and 1964.[9] Designed by American gun manufacturer ArmaLite in 1956, it was based on its AR-10 rifle. The ArmaLite AR-15 was designed to be a lightweight rifle and to fire a new high-velocity, lightweight, small-caliber cartridge to allow infantrymen to carry more ammunition.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

miketx said:


> Sez the stupid gun banner. That statement your lying ass quoted was the gun talking. Yeah, I know guns can't really talk. Buffoon.


Stay on topic....
Now back to the AR15 which you seem to know nothing about. It was a military rifle FIRST.








						Eugene Stoner: The Forgotten History of the Man Who Created "America's Rifle" – the AR-15
					

Eugene Stoner was the father of the AR-15 and the M16, and a titan in the world of both military- and civilian-use firearms. This is the forgotten history of how he changed the landscape of American firearms, as well as the world stage, and became the archetypal “self-made American man.”




					ammo.com


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 23, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> These people look happy stupid but happy.
> I wouldn't waste my teabags.
> 
> View attachment 673488
> ...


As I said it's better to be the teabagger than the recipient. But then again you probably like getting teabagged.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Stay on topic....


When conservatives do that they end up losing the argument – hence the failed attempt to deflect.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> When conservatives do that they end up losing the argument – hence the failed attempt to deflect.


Yup. I get accused of deflection when I go back on topic. Hilarious. When they are wrong, it’s time for insults.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 23, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> When conservatives do that they end up losing the argument – hence the failed attempt to deflect.


Do you first must make a truthful statement to win an argument.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Do you first must make a truthful statement to win an argument.


Simply put. The AR15 was first designed as select fire replacement for the military. The AR15 was not intended for civilian use.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> 12 year old ? Where did that come from ?You’re a confused little puppy. A .222 round or cartridge is not the same as a .223 round. Neither is it the same as a .22 round which travels as much as 2000 ft per second less.
> You seem not to understand a round includes both the bullet and the casing and primer You’re all over the place.


For one I didn't say it was exactly the same I said a .223 was basically a .222 round with a higher powder load.

Learn how to read


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Not in California. Connecticut. Delaware. Maryland. Massachusetts. New Hampshire. New Jersey. New York.
> So like hell they’re protected by the BOR. No challenges, no overturns. No fking way. Case closed.


So what?

A mini 14 is an equivalent replacement and those aren't banned.

Just goes to show how fucking stupid people are


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Simply put. The AR15 was first designed as select fire replacement for the military. The AR15 was not intended for civilian use.


Any semiautomatic rifle is a civilian rifle.  It doesn't matter what it looks like


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Any semiautomatic rifle is a civilian rifle.  It doesn't matter what it looks like


Not according to six states which have “ banned“ assault weapons according to their definition. None have been over turned.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Not according to six states which have “ banned“ assault weapons according to their definition. None have been over turned.



Yes use stupidity as your example.

It is utterly STUPID to think that banning a rifle for cosmetic reasons will do anything to stop people from using guns to murder people.


----------



## miketx (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa just bought an ar.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Not according to six states which have “ banned“ assault weapons according to their definition. None have been over turned.


Correct.

Lawmakers determine what constitutes an assault weapon for regulatory purposes – not gun manufacturers, the military, or message board posters.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> A mini 14 is an equivalent replacement and those aren't banned.


I don’t doubt you think that way. But because you haven’t read the assault weapon ban in each state, you have no idea what features would make it banned.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

miketx said:


> Dagosa just bought an ar.
> 
> View attachment 673621


You must have been drooling when you posted that.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> I don’t doubt you think that way. But because you haven’t read the assault weapon ban in each state, you have no idea what features would make it banned.


There is nothing that would ban a stock mini 14.

I know people who live in CT an I know that at least 3 of them own a mini 14 so it's not banned.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> I don’t doubt you think that way. But because you haven’t read the assault weapon ban in each state, you have no idea what features would make it banned.


Conservatives will ridicule provisions of a state’s AWB where features such as a collapsible stock, pistol grip, or bayonet lug are cosmetic only and have nothing to do with the lethality of the weapon.

They’ll also trot out the canard that a semi-auto AR 15 isn’t an assault weapon as defined by the military, as not being select fire.

This is the usual ignorant, dishonest rhetoric from the right.

If a law-making body determines that a firearm with a collapsible stock, pistol grip, and a bayonet lug is an assault weapon, then it’s an assault weapon as a fact of law, subject to the regulations and restrictions applied to an assault weapon.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Conservatives will ridicule provisions of a state’s AWB where features such as a collapsible stock, pistol grip, or bayonet lug are cosmetic only and have nothing to do with the lethality of the weapon.
> 
> They’ll also trot out the canard that a semi-auto AR 15 isn’t an assault weapon as defined by the military, as not being select fire.
> 
> ...


Exactly. The gun a holic clan usually has no idea that the assault weapon definition is part of every legislation that regulates them. They can vary slightly from state to state.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Exactly. The gun a holic clan usually has no idea that the assault weapon definition is part of every legislation that regulates them. They can vary slightly from state to state.


And every one of them are cosmetic reasons.

Here is what CT considers to be an "assault" rifle

_*The definition of an assault weapon includes any semiautomatic centerfire rifle that can accept a detachable magazine (one that can be removed without disassembling the firearm action) and has at least one of the following features:

1. a folding or telescoping stock;

2. a grip, such as a pistol grip, a thumbhole stock, or other stock, the use of which would allow an individual to grip the weapon, resulting in any finger on the trigger hand in addition to the trigger finger being directly below any portion of the action of the weapon when firing;

3. a forward pistol grip;

4. a flash suppressor; or
*_
*5. a grenade launcher or flare launcher.*


Not a single thing on that list has any bearing on the performance of the rifle or its lethality


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> And every one of them are cosmetic reasons.


That’s your opinion, not that of the military and every gov agency and law making body says about these features. You guys like to pretend you know what the constitution provides for, but you’re nearly always wrong.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> And every one of them are cosmetic reasons.
> 
> Here is what CT considers to be an "assault" rifle
> 
> ...


Of. course  you’ve read the the laws in the states that regulate assault weapons ? Sounds like you haven’t.


----------



## miketx (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> You must have been drooling when you posted that.


No, I was posting it because you are a worthless man meat choking piss boy commie bed wetter.


----------



## miketx (Jul 23, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Conservatives will ridicule provisions of a state’s AWB where features such as a collapsible stock, pistol grip, or bayonet lug are cosmetic only and have nothing to do with the lethality of the weapon.
> 
> They’ll also trot out the canard that a semi-auto AR 15 isn’t an assault weapon as defined by the military, as not being select fire.
> 
> ...





Dagosa said:


> Exactly. The gun a holic clan usually has no idea that the assault weapon definition is part of every legislation that regulates them. They can vary slightly from state to state.


We're waiting on you commie scum. C'mon down!


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

miketx said:


> We're waiting on you commie scum. C'mon down!


Another tough guy. Runout of intelligent things to say ?
Does yo mama know you’re up early in the basement bedroom ?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

miketx said:


> No, I was posting it because you are a worthless man meat choking piss boy commie bed wetter.


You talk like your afraid of the closet.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

miketx said:


> We're waiting on you commie scum. C'mon down!


I heard that a bunch Oklahoma gun  a holics were moving to Texas, in hopes of raising the IQ level of both states.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> There is nothing that would ban a stock mini 14.
> 
> I know people who live in CT an I know that at least 3 of them own a mini 14 so it's not banned.


And may not be until someone uses it to kill school children. You think this is a fking game ? Not to the loved ones of those murdered.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Yes use stupidity as your example.
> 
> It is utterly STUPID to think that banning a rifle for cosmetic reasons will do anything to stop people from using guns to murder people.


Take your case to someone who cares about your opinions.


----------



## miketx (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> And may not be until someone uses it to kill school children. You think this is a fking game ? Not to the loved ones of those murdered.


Then stop murdering kids butcher.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

miketx said:


> Then stop murdering kids butcher.


Go replace your tampon. You’re starting  to smell.


----------



## miketx (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Another tough guy. Runout of intelligent things to say ?
> Does yo mama know you’re up early in the basement bedroom ?


How come you won't answer the question communist?


----------



## miketx (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Go replace your tampon. You’re stating to smell.


How come you wont answer the question communist?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

miketx said:


> How come you wont answer the question communist?


Burp.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Stay on topic....
> Now back to the AR15 which you seem to know nothing about. It was a military rifle FIRST.
> 
> 
> ...




And yet it was a civilian rifle first.......you idiot....

*“Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963. It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the ‘Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle’ began on Jan 2, 1964,”


 one critic of the article contended. “The M16 wasn’t issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn’t standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn’t officially replace the M14 until 1969.”*

Original ATF AR-15 Classification Refutes Claim that Rifle ‘Not Meant’ for Civilians


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Simply put. The AR15 was first designed as select fire replacement for the military. The AR15 was not intended for civilian use.




And yet there are over 24 million of them in private hands....with a bare handful used for crime each year...in fact, you dumb ass......knives kill more people each year than these rifles do....as do clubs and bare hands......cars as well.....so we better ban cars...


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> I don’t doubt you think that way. But because you haven’t read the assault weapon ban in each state, you have no idea what features would make it banned.


According to lawmakers, removeable magazines, pistol grips, bayonet lugs (OK I'll give you that one), flash suppressors.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> According to lawmakers, removeable magazines, pistol grips, bayonet lugs (OK I'll give you that one), flash suppressors.


What is key, is the and/or each of the features.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jul 23, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> What is key, is the and/or each of the features.


In California it’s any one or combination of those features.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 23, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> In California it’s any one or combination of those features.


Yup.


----------



## Smokin' OP (Jul 24, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> As I said it's better to be the teabagger than the recipient. But then again you probably like getting teabagged.


So, that's what y'all do at your Tea party "meetings", I don't care to read/hear about.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> That’s your opinion, not that of the military and every gov agency and law making body says about these features. You guys like to pretend you know what the constitution provides for, but you’re nearly always wrong.


If you know anything about guns you know that they are merely cosmetic.

And I didn;t mention anything about the Constitution  I stated that it is stupid to think banning a rifle on the basis of cosmetic additions is going to prevent any murders.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Of. course  you’ve read the the laws in the states that regulate assault weapons ? Sounds like you haven’t.


I posted the the definition used in the CT law, Moron


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> And may not be until someone uses it to kill school children. You think this is a fking game ? Not to the loved ones of those murdered.


Any other gun can be used to shoot school children.

Are you that fucking stupid?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Take your case to someone who cares about your opinions.


Then why are you bothering to reply to me?

Asshole.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Any other gun can be used to shoot school children.
> 
> Are you that fucking stupid?


Sure, keep telling yourself that as an excuse to play stupid.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Sure, keep telling yourself that as an excuse to play stupid.


Really you actually think a mini 14 would not have resulted in the same death toll at Uvalve?

You actually think that same death toll could not have been achieved with any of a thousand other firearms?


So you're not only a fucking moron you are being a fucking moron intentionally.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> *Really you actually think a mini 14 would not have resulted in the same death toll at Uvalve?*
> 
> You actually think that same death toll could not have been achieved with any of a thousand other firearms?
> 
> ...


What a moron. The  cult following of the AR15 makes it more likely to be used along with the obvious advantages of the accessories. You’re such a neophyte. It standard form, the min14 was used in how many mass shootings ? Think about it dufus.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> What a moron. The  cult following of the AR15 makes it more likely to be used along with the obvious advantages of the accessories. You’re such a neophyte. It standard form, the min14 was used in how many mass shootings ? Think about it dufus.


OH so not it's not more lethal it's just more popular.

Gee who would have thought the most popular rifle in the country might be used in more crimes than the least popular rifle.

If we use your so called logic to fight drunk driving we could say banning Bud Light, the most popular beer in the country, then we could end drunk driving.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> OH so not it's not more lethal it's just more popular.


Exactly. The AR15 is most popular with you sissy boys.  If no one bought them in such volume to put the hands of criminals bent on killing children and the vulnerable in high numbers, THERE WOULD BE NO PROBLEM. MORE GUNS, MORE GUN VIOLENCE.

More firearms that aid mass shootings, the more mass

 shootings…..your mere being proponent of the free unregulated distribution of firearms like they AR15 makes you an accessory.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Gee who would have thought the most popular rifle in the country might be used in more crimes than the least popular rifle.


What a dumb comment. From shear numbers, handguns dominate because of concealment advantage. Effectiveness….dominated by AR15 platform, the choice of sissy boys and mass shooters.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Exactly. The AR15 is most popular with you sissy boys.  If no one bought them in such volume to put the hands of criminals bent on killing children and the vulnerable in high numbers, THERE WOULD BE NO PROBLEM. MORE GUNS, MORE GUN VIOLENCE.
> 
> More firearms that aid mass shootings, the more mass
> 
> shootings…..your mere being proponent of the free unregulated distribution of firearms like they AR15 makes you an accessory.


I don't own an AR 15 because I already have a small caliber rat gun.

25 million legally owned AR 15 rifles in this country and that's probably a low ball estimate

of the last 80 "mass shootings 20 were committed with an AR 

That is .000083% of the legally owned AR s in this country









						AR-15 Rifles Were Used in 26 Percent of the Last 80 Mass Shootings in U.S.
					

AR-15s were used in the Las Vegas shooting, the Parkland, Florida, shooting and Monday's shooting in Boulder, Colorado.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> What a dumb comment. From shear numbers, handguns dominate because of concealment advantage. Effectiveness….dominated by AR15 platform, the choice of sissy boys and mass shooters.


No shit Sherlock.

Everyone knows that and you continue to whine about semiautomatic rifles


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 24, 2022)

Smokin' OP said:


> So, that's what y'all do at your Tea party "meetings", I don't care to read/hear about.


No it's what your boyfriend does to you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> I don't own an AR 15 because I already have a small caliber rat gun.
> 
> 25 million legally owned AR 15 rifles in this country and that's probably a low ball estimate
> 
> ...


You can actually get the AR platform in many different calibers.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> You can actually get the AR platform in many different calibers.


But those more powerful calibers aren't the concern of people who want to ban them'

And The AR platform isn't anything special and it does not add to the lethality of the round fired which is the argument of the gun banners

In fact none of the things used by the state and federal governments to define what makes a semiauto rifle and "assault" rifle increase the power, range rate of fire or lethality of those rifles.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> But those more powerful calibers aren't the concern of people who want to ban them'
> 
> And The AR platform isn't anything special and it does not add to the lethality of the round fired which is the argument of the gun banners
> 
> In fact none of the things used by the state and federal governments to define what makes a semiauto rifle and "assault" rifle increase the power, range rate of fire or lethality of those rifles.


They only attack the .223/5.56 because they are uninformed


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> They only attack the .223/5.56 because they are uninformed



Of course they are.  It's the same reason they think a flash suppressor makes a rifle more lethal


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Of course they are.  It's the same reason they think a flash suppressor makes a rifle more lethal


And a silencer Hollywood quite.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Any other gun can be used to shoot school children.
> 
> Are you that fucking stupid?


The Virginia tech mass shooter used two revolvers.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> No shit Sherlock.
> 
> Everyone knows that and you continue to whine about semiautomatic rifles


You have no point at all. All semi autos, rifles and pistols need  to be revisited. Not because they are semi auto alone, but because of sissy boy infatuation with high cap mags and other features that make them more deadly for  law enforcement. You sound like you’ve never served and know little about LE.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Really you actually think a mini 14 would not have resulted in the same death toll at Uvalve?
> 
> You actually think that same death toll could not have been achieved with any of a thousand other firearms?
> 
> ...


You have now officially elevated yourself from gun a holic to feckless sissy boy.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Jul 24, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The right’s fearmongering and lies about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscations’ are even more ridiculous


Fine, then we can have machine guns?


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Jul 24, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Sure, keep telling yourself that as an excuse to play stupid.


Is it your argument that no other gun will be used to shoot children?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 24, 2022)

Bootney Lee Farnsworth said:


> Is it your argument that no other gun will be used to shoot children?


Nope.


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 24, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The Virginia tech mass shooter used two revolvers.


You think Glock makes revolvers  ?


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 24, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> And a silencer Hollywood quite.





Dagosa said:


> You have no point at all. All semi autos, rifles and pistols need  to be revisited. Not because they are semi auto alone, but because of sissy boy infatuation with high cap mags and other features that make them more deadly for  law enforcement. You sound like you’ve never served and know little about LE.


No they don't.

The fact is that the vast majority of people who legally own any firearms will never shoot anyone.

You have a .004% chance of being murdered by a person using a gun of any kind

So stop being such a fucking PUSSY


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> No they don't.
> 
> The fact is that the vast majority of people who legally own any firearms will never shoot anyone.
> 
> ...


Why the fk do you need a gun then if there is so little chance you ever needing one ? You’re 4-5 times more likely to get shot if you carry a gun. ……you feckless sissy boy.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 25, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Why the fk do you need a gun then if there is so little chance you ever needing one ? You’re 4-5 times more likely to get shot if you carry a gun. ……you feckless sissy boy.


Why the fuck do you need homeowners insurance if there is so little chance of your house burning down?

Why the fuck do you need life insurance?

It only takes one time just one and a violent crime could affect your life forever.

Your one of those assholes who think that violent crime doesn't exist.

I was the victim of a violent crime when I was 18 that put me in the hospital with a ruptured spleen, 3 broken ribs, a grade 4 concussion and a fractured eye orbital.  I still have the scars on my face and seome permanent vision impairment in my left eye.

So unlike you in your little fantasy world where crime doesn't exist I know there is real violence in this world.

And I dontt own guns to shoot anyone I own guns so I can protect myself and my wife


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 25, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> And every one of them are cosmetic reasons.


Reasons which are perfectly appropriate as a matter of law.

The definition of an assault weapon is whatever a lawmaking body determines it to be.

That the definition as a matter of law is different from that of the military neither undermines nor renders illegitimate what constitutes an assault weapon, or the measures enacted to regulate such weapons.

Laws are made by legislatures, not the military.

Indeed, the courts will use those very ‘cosmetic’ features to determine the constitutionality of assault weapon ban, not subjective semantics.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 25, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Reasons which are perfectly appropriate as a matter of law.
> 
> The definition of an assault weapon is whatever a lawmaking body determines it to be.
> 
> ...


Perfectly stupid has always been perfectly appropriate as far as laws are concerned


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 25, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Reasons which are perfectly appropriate as a matter of law.
> 
> The definition of an assault weapon is whatever a lawmaking body determines it to be.
> 
> ...


Is a pencil a pen just because it looks like a pen?


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 25, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Why the fuck do you need homeowners insurance if there is so little chance of your house burning down?
> 
> Why the fuck do you need life insurance?
> 
> ...


First bubba, I hear you, but many of us used to get the shit kicked out of us on a regular basis when young, til we got life, played football for 13 years started doing payback time. We didn’t buy a gun to carry daily till our jobs demanded it. We were brought up hunting and fishing and kicking ass. Entire families were we lived  served in the military except moms and sisters who married service men. No one got out of our  families where we lived figuratively  “alive“ unless we served our country. So the right’s  bullshit is disturbing to real Americans on every level.
We own guns bubba……


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 25, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Why the fuck do you need homeowners insurance if there is so little chance of your house burning down?
> 
> Why the fuck do you need life insurance?
> 
> ...


Btw, no law that has been proposed by the left on the federal level, keeps law abiding citizens from possessing a firearm.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 25, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> First bubba, I hear you, but many of us used to get the shit kicked out of us on a regular basis when young, til we got life, played football for 13 years started doing payback time. We didn’t buy a gun to carry daily till our jobs demanded it. We were brought up hunting and fishing and kicking ass. Entire families were we lived  served in the military except moms and sisters who married service men. No one got out of our  families where we lived figuratively  “alive“ unless we served our country. So the right’s  bullshit is disturbing to real Americans on every level.
> We own guns bubba……



I bought a gun for self protection.  And being jumped by 3 assholes and being beaten and stomped unconscious isn't one of your little high school slap fights.

The Dr told me that between my injuries and the hypothermia I could have just as easily died


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 25, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Btw, no law that has been proposed by the left on the federal level, keeps law abiding citizens from possessing a firearm.



No you just want to ban this and that because you're afraid of guns

Pussy


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 25, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> No you just want to ban this and that because you're afraid of guns
> 
> Pussy


The only thing proposed laws ban, is assholes selling guns to criminals.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 26, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> The only thing proposed laws ban, is assholes selling guns to criminals.


That's not what you want though is it?

You want to ban guns because you're afraid


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 26, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> That's not what you want though is it?
> 
> You want to ban guns because you're afraid


Troll. It’s already apparent I know more about firearms, their history and firearm laws then you. Should be apparent why.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 26, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Troll. It’s already apparent I know more about firearms, their history and firearm laws then you. Should be apparent why.


It's only apparent to you because of your inflated opinion of yourself.

What idiot thinks a 5'56 mm round is more lethal than a 7.62mm round?

YOU


----------



## Dagosa (Jul 31, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> It's only apparent to you because of your inflated opinion of yourself.
> 
> What idiot thinks a 5'56 mm round is more lethal than a 7.62mm round?
> 
> YOU


Geesus you are just like Trump, making up shit.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2022)

Dagosa said:


> Geesus you are just like Trump, making up shit.




How far away?  Where did you hit the target?

Please...elaborate...

5.56 at longer ranges is less effective than 7.62 which is why the U.S. military is dumping the 5.56....after decades of shooting at muslim terrorists across mountain tops....


----------



## miketx (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


I want one cause 3 inches of bone will not get me!


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 31, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> No you just want to ban this and that because you're afraid of guns
> 
> Pussy


Where there are ample other firearms available for self-defense; indeed, handguns constitute an entire class of weapons within the scope of Second Amendment protections – handguns which are the preferred and most effective means of self-defense with a firearm.

The lie conservatives attempt to advance is that some seek to ‘ban’ all firearms – when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

And it’s a lie to claim that one ‘needs’ an AR 15; that absent an AR 15 or other firearms designated as assault weapons, one is ‘deprived’ of adequate self-defense, or his ability to realize self-defense is somehow ‘mitigated’ or ‘compromised.’


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Where there are ample other firearms available for self-defense; indeed, handguns constitute an entire class of weapons within the scope of Second Amendment protections – handguns which are the preferred and most effective means of self-defense with a firearm.
> 
> The lie conservatives attempt to advance is that some seek to ‘ban’ all firearms – when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
> 
> And it’s a lie to claim that one ‘needs’ an AR 15; that absent an AR 15 or other firearms designated as assault weapons, one is ‘deprived’ of adequate self-defense, or his ability to realize self-defense is somehow ‘mitigated’ or ‘compromised.’




It is.....not all threats happen at handgun range, you twit.   And a handgun is nowhere near as effective against a mob of democrat party brown shirts, blm and antifa, as they move on your business to burn and loot it, and possibly murder you and your workers.....a rifle makes them keep moving down the line to loot, and burn businesses not protected by rifles.


----------



## miketx (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Where there are ample other firearms available for self-defense; indeed, handguns constitute an entire class of weapons within the scope of Second Amendment protections – handguns which are the preferred and most effective means of self-defense with a firearm.
> 
> The lie conservatives attempt to advance is that some seek to ‘ban’ all firearms – when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
> 
> And it’s a lie to claim that one ‘needs’ an AR 15; that absent an AR 15 or other firearms designated as assault weapons, one is ‘deprived’ of adequate self-defense, or his ability to realize self-defense is somehow ‘mitigated’ or ‘compromised.’


All you do is lie.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Where there are ample other firearms available for self-defense; indeed, handguns constitute an entire class of weapons within the scope of Second Amendment protections – handguns which are the preferred and most effective means of self-defense with a firearm.
> 
> The lie conservatives attempt to advance is that some seek to ‘ban’ all firearms – when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
> 
> And it’s a lie to claim that one ‘needs’ an AR 15; that absent an AR 15 or other firearms designated as assault weapons, one is ‘deprived’ of adequate self-defense, or his ability to realize self-defense is somehow ‘mitigated’ or ‘compromised.’


Tell me then what is the sense of banning one rifle platform solely for cosmetic reasons?

What's going to stop the next wannabe school shooter from choosing a mini 14 instead of an AR 15?

When the mini 14 is used for a school shooting will you want to ban that too?

Then what's going to stop a wannabe school shooter from using any other semiautomatic rifle?

etc

The ban this ban that policy is based on nothing logical and will only lead to people crying to ban more weapons.

The real goal here is to ban centerfire semiautomatic rifles for civilian use and it has nothing to do with mass shootings


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 31, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Tell me then what is the sense of banning one rifle platform solely for cosmetic reasons?
> 
> What's going to stop the next wannabe school shooter from choosing a mini 14 instead of an AR 15?
> 
> ...


No one ‘needs’ an an AR 15 – that’s the point.

Opposed to AWBs? So am I – but make a valid argument in opposition to AWBs:

‘Bans’ don’t work

‘Bans’ are unwarranted government excess and overreach

‘Bans’ are potentially un-Constitutional

But "I 'need’ an AR 15 to ‘defend against government tyranny'" is an ignorant, invalid argument completely devoid of merit.


----------



## Blues Man (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No one ‘needs’ an an AR 15 – that’s the point.
> 
> Opposed to AWBs? So am I – but make a valid argument in opposition to AWBs:
> 
> ...



Needs and rights have absolutely nothing to do with each other.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Where there are ample other firearms available for self-defense; indeed, handguns constitute an entire class of weapons within the scope of Second Amendment protections – handguns which are the preferred and most effective means of self-defense with a firearm.
> 
> The lie conservatives attempt to advance is that some seek to ‘ban’ all firearms – when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
> 
> And it’s a lie to claim that one ‘needs’ an AR 15; that absent an AR 15 or other firearms designated as assault weapons, one is ‘deprived’ of adequate self-defense, or his ability to realize self-defense is somehow ‘mitigated’ or ‘compromised.’


Shut your lying whore mouth, you gun grabbing piece of shit.

Machine guns or Valhalla.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No one ‘needs’ an an AR 15 – that’s the point


Yes I do.  Fuck you.  You don't know shit.

Mind your own cocksucking business.


----------



## 2aguy (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No one ‘needs’ an an AR 15 – that’s the point.
> 
> Opposed to AWBs? So am I – but make a valid argument in opposition to AWBs:
> 
> ...



Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say anything about justifying the exercise of a Right by showing government why you deserve to exercise that Right?

You don’t need a computer, or any electronic devise but they are protected by the 1st Amendment.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Jul 31, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say anything about justifying the exercise of a Right by showing government why you deserve to exercise that Right?
> 
> You don’t need a computer, or any electronic devise but they are protected by the 1st Amendment.


I am completely done arguing with that lying gun-grabber piece of shit. 

He lies his ass off about not wanting to ban all guns.  Don't believe a word out of his tyrant, lying, shit-spewing face.


----------



## badbob85037 (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


Most people want an AR 15 to put you out of your misery, clown!


----------



## Markle (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


As you know, there is no need, whatsoever, for me to "justify" owning an AR-15 or any other weapon.  Right?


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Jul 31, 2022)

Markle said:


> As you know, there is no need, whatsoever, for me to "justify" owning an AR-15 or any other weapon.  Right?


I think Clayton needs to justify keeping his head.


----------



## miketx (Jul 31, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No one ‘needs’ an an AR 15 – that’s the point.
> 
> Opposed to AWBs? So am I – but make a valid argument in opposition to AWBs:
> 
> ...


Rights don't come with a needs clause, liar. Come get us!


----------



## badbob85037 (Nov 18, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.
> 
> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.
> 
> ...


You couldn't be more wrong and here is why. Anyone who's panties are all bunched up over any firearm doesn't know the first thing about firearms or the thrill in putting a small piece of lead in the center of a target from 6 feet to a mile out.  Believe it our not it's a great sport for the whole family. They build on the building blocks of life teaching safety and self reliance The reasonability of every parent to teach his children when young. I read over and over some yahoo leaving his firearm where some child finds it. My children would tell an adult and I . then just hope the adult has the same training my children have.  In a nation with over 400 million firearms not teaching your kids the use and safety of fire arms should have child protection service make a call to their  home. So dry out a iron those panties and pull that head out before your kid finds a gun and make all your nightmares come true. Don't be scared.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 18, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.


As you know:
The exercise of a right does not require a justification; your perception of need is irrelevant.
/ Thread


----------



## Failzero (Nov 18, 2022)

My answer is always “ I collect Military Firearms of the second half of the 20th century “


----------

