12 Dead in Mass Shooting at So.Cal Bar

[Daryl Hunt]

You shouldnt be using weapons that look but more importantly function like a war weapon. You shouldnt be using a pump action shotgun unless you are defending your home.

The pump action shotgun is an actual, current War weapon...... used by our military all over the world......the AR-15 has never been used in a war....

Thats why a pump action shotgun should never be carried in public. The AR-15 looks just like the M16A! rifle so that should be banned.

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

I sometimes question that as well. But I think it should be left up to the Local Governments and outlaw the NRA from spending Millions on trying to overturn the regulations that they don't think should happen. Right now, in this state, the NRA is a dirty word after spending millions in 2013 over lesser gun regulations that stood in court but it cost the state millions to defend against. It cost us money for schools, roads, bridges and more to pay for that boondoggle. It even mean 3 special elections where only one was a successful recall that was overturned on the very next election. The NRA isn't winning so well lately. The States are starting to stand on their own hind legs are are growing a pair.

 

[pismoe]

thanks for putting the 'BULL ZHIT'ers ' in their place with your fine article Hunacrcy . -------------------------- --- Here Are 7 Animals Hunters Kill Using an AR-15 --- the board liars and 'bull zhiters' lie , lie and lie some more and i am happy to point that out to the boards readers with your link Hunarcy ,

Come up here and hunt with an AR-15 and we'll laugh you out of the woods. No kidding.

------------------------------------------------------- ONLY point is that YOU Lie .

 

[OldLady]

The pump action shotgun is an actual, current War weapon...... used by our military all over the world......the AR-15 has never been used in a war....

Thats why a pump action shotgun should never be carried in public. The AR-15 looks just like the M16A! rifle so that should be banned.

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

I sometimes question that as well. But I think it should be left up to the Local Governments and outlaw the NRA from spending Millions on trying to overturn the regulations that they don't think should happen. Right now, in this state, the NRA is a dirty word after spending millions in 2013 over lesser gun regulations that stood in court but it cost the state millions to defend against. It cost us money for schools, roads, bridges and more to pay for that boondoggle. It even mean 3 special elections where only one was a successful recall that was overturned on the very next election. The NRA isn't winning so well lately. The States are starting to stand on their own hind legs are are growing a pair.

I didn't know the NRA did that kind of thing. That's a shame.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

thanks for putting the 'BULL ZHIT'ers ' in their place with your fine article Hunacrcy . -------------------------- --- Here Are 7 Animals Hunters Kill Using an AR-15 --- the board liars and 'bull zhiters' lie , lie and lie some more and i am happy to point that out to the boards readers with your link Hunarcy ,

Come up here and hunt with an AR-15 and we'll laugh you out of the woods. No kidding.

------------------------------------------------------- ONLY point is that YOU Lie .

You get caught hunting deer around here with an AR-15 and it's going to be a stiff fine and some hard time. As for Varmints, we don't have too many of those and the 223 doesn't have the range really to make a good coyote round. For the smaller varmints that are good to eat, the 22lr is a much better choice and doesn't make such a mess out of the meat. If you can't kill a squirrel with a 22lr then just stay home and watch your fake War Movies.

 

[2aguy]

The pump action shotgun is an actual, current War weapon...... used by our military all over the world......the AR-15 has never been used in a war....

Thats why a pump action shotgun should never be carried in public. The AR-15 looks just like the M16A! rifle so that should be banned.

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

I sometimes question that as well. But I think it should be left up to the Local Governments and outlaw the NRA from spending Millions on trying to overturn the regulations that they don't think should happen. Right now, in this state, the NRA is a dirty word after spending millions in 2013 over lesser gun regulations that stood in court but it cost the state millions to defend against. It cost us money for schools, roads, bridges and more to pay for that boondoggle. It even mean 3 special elections where only one was a successful recall that was overturned on the very next election. The NRA isn't winning so well lately. The States are starting to stand on their own hind legs are are growing a pair.

Wow.... the stupid is strong with you....the NRA fights for our Right to keep and bear arms...and as a fascist, you want them outlawed from exercising their 1st Amendment Rights.....you really are the dumb fascist we always believed you to be....

 

[pismoe]

thanks for putting the 'BULL ZHIT'ers ' in their place with your fine article Hunacrcy . -------------------------- --- Here Are 7 Animals Hunters Kill Using an AR-15 --- the board liars and 'bull zhiters' lie , lie and lie some more and i am happy to point that out to the boards readers with your link Hunarcy ,

Come up here and hunt with an AR-15 and we'll laugh you out of the woods. No kidding.

------------------------------------------------------- ONLY point is that YOU Lie .

You get caught hunting deer around here with an AR-15 and it's going to be a stiff fine and some hard time. As for Varmints, we don't have too many of those and the 223 doesn't have the range really to make a good coyote round. For the smaller varmints that are good to eat, the 22lr is a much better choice and doesn't make such a mess out of the meat. If you can't kill a squirrel with a 22lr then just stay home and watch your fake War Movies.

---------------------------------- read the link and learn something Daryl --- Here Are 7 Animals Hunters Kill Using an AR-15 --- And i think that there are a few states that allow hunting deer with .223 though i don't know which states they are . And who cares about your OPINION about which round is proper or not proper just so it is legal . And my main point is to highlight the lies that YOU Gun controllers put up on the board so that the board can see the lies and and also see WHO posted the lies and 'BS' so keep posting Daryl .

 

[Skull Pilot]

You shouldnt be using weapons that look but more importantly function like a war weapon. You shouldnt be using a pump action shotgun unless you are defending your home.

The pump action shotgun is an actual, current War weapon...... used by our military all over the world......the AR-15 has never been used in a war....

Thats why a pump action shotgun should never be carried in public. The AR-15 looks just like the M16A! rifle so that should be banned.

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

The AR 15 operates exactly like every other semiautomatic rifle that is available to civilians

How many times do you have to be told that the only difference between the AR and any other rifle of the same caliber is cosmetic and cosmetic only?

 

[Skull Pilot]

thanks for putting the 'BULL ZHIT'ers ' in their place with your fine article Hunacrcy . -------------------------- --- Here Are 7 Animals Hunters Kill Using an AR-15 --- the board liars and 'bull zhiters' lie , lie and lie some more and i am happy to point that out to the boards readers with your link Hunarcy ,

Come up here and hunt with an AR-15 and we'll laugh you out of the woods. No kidding.

You can't understand that it depends on what you are hunting can you?

Small game. rodent and varmint control don''t call for a large caliber rifle

I wouldn't hunt deer with less than a 6.8 mm

 

[pismoe]

respectfully , they don't care about your accurate info , Daryl and the OldLady and 'feinstein' are gun controllers and they want to CONTROL real Americans Skull .

 

[Skull Pilot]

respectfully , they don't care about your accurate info , Daryl and the OldLady and 'feinstein' are gun controllers and they want to CONTROL real Americans Skull .

I know I've been on here long enough to know who the control freaks are

 

[OldLady]

The pump action shotgun is an actual, current War weapon...... used by our military all over the world......the AR-15 has never been used in a war....

Thats why a pump action shotgun should never be carried in public. The AR-15 looks just like the M16A! rifle so that should be banned.

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

The AR 15 operates exactly like every other semiautomatic rifle that is available to civilians

How many times do you have to be told that the only difference between the AR and any other rifle of the same caliber is cosmetic and cosmetic only?

I've gone into the gun afficianado magazines and read many articles that explain why the AR is so popular. Being a gun nut, I'm sure you realize why they are so popular. So don't try telling me it's only that it looks cooler. I know better.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Thats why a pump action shotgun should never be carried in public. The AR-15 looks just like the M16A! rifle so that should be banned.

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

The AR 15 operates exactly like every other semiautomatic rifle that is available to civilians

How many times do you have to be told that the only difference between the AR and any other rifle of the same caliber is cosmetic and cosmetic only?

I've gone into the gun afficianado magazines and read many articles that explain why the AR is so popular. Being a gun nut, I'm sure you realize why they are so popular. So don't try telling me it's only that it looks cooler. I know better.

Then why don't you tell me how an AR 15 is so vastly different than my Mini 14

They shoot the exact same round at the exact same rate of fire with comparable accuracy

so tell me why the AR 15 is somehow magically different

Then you can tell me why a black car is faster than a red car even though they are exactly the same in every other way

 

[pismoe]

but a change of subject that everyone might be interested in . --- M1A™ Tactical Rifle | Top Semi Automatic Firearms | Buy M1A --- which . 308 rifle of these would make the best Deer and Black Bear huntin rifle eh ?? Think that you'd have to get a 3 or 5 round huntin magazine to be legal but other then that the gun would sure be able to kill Deer and Bear for the Dining Table eh Daryl .

 

[2aguy]

Seems the NRA can be blamed for these deaths as well.
The Gun Nutter NRA Killer crew blocked what CA. voted to remove.
Like really 98% of people dying by guns really in what the NRA sponsors.

View attachment 228112

What you fail to understand is that the magazine had nothing to do with how many people he killed...... the fact is that shooting unarmed people is what allowed him to kill so many people..... had there been armed civilians in that bar, they would have stopped him from killing.....but they were unarmed thanks to you...

The magazine in a gun is easily and quickly changed out, so the number of bullets in the magazine have no bearing on the killer who is shooting people who can't shoot back....there is an actual study on this.....

And did you read the Judges opinion on the Temporary injunction against the magazine ban in California...he understands what you don't understand... you should read it...

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

--------

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

Specifically, we searched for

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

(4) the types of guns possessed,

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

(6) the number of rounds fired,

(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

-----


SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.

 

[2aguy]

You shouldnt be using weapons that look but more importantly function like a war weapon. You shouldnt be using a pump action shotgun unless you are defending your home.

The pump action shotgun is an actual, current War weapon...... used by our military all over the world......the AR-15 has never been used in a war....

Thats why a pump action shotgun should never be carried in public. The AR-15 looks just like the M16A! rifle so that should be banned.

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

No...... it is a semi automatic rifle, no different from any other civilian semi automatic rifle...you can make up names for it all you want, it doesn't change the truth.

A pump action shotgun was used to murder 21 people, not 12, in Crimea..... it held 4 shells ( for you, think bullets) before it needed to be reloaded......and he murdered 21 people with it because of his choice of targets...unarmed people......

 

[pismoe]

Thats why a pump action shotgun should never be carried in public. The AR-15 looks just like the M16A! rifle so that should be banned.

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

The AR 15 operates exactly like every other semiautomatic rifle that is available to civilians

How many times do you have to be told that the only difference between the AR and any other rifle of the same caliber is cosmetic and cosmetic only?

I've gone into the gun afficianado magazines and read many articles that explain why the AR is so popular. Being a gun nut, I'm sure you realize why they are so popular. So don't try telling me it's only that it looks cooler. I know better.

--------------------------------------------------- AR's are LEGAL Guns and though i don't care about hunting too much anymore AR's are legal for ALL Lawful purposes OldLADY .

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Thats why a pump action shotgun should never be carried in public. The AR-15 looks just like the M16A! rifle so that should be banned.

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

I sometimes question that as well. But I think it should be left up to the Local Governments and outlaw the NRA from spending Millions on trying to overturn the regulations that they don't think should happen. Right now, in this state, the NRA is a dirty word after spending millions in 2013 over lesser gun regulations that stood in court but it cost the state millions to defend against. It cost us money for schools, roads, bridges and more to pay for that boondoggle. It even mean 3 special elections where only one was a successful recall that was overturned on the very next election. The NRA isn't winning so well lately. The States are starting to stand on their own hind legs are are growing a pair.

Wow.... the stupid is strong with you....the NRA fights for our Right to keep and bear arms...and as a fascist, you want them outlawed from exercising their 1st Amendment Rights.....you really are the dumb fascist we always believed you to be....

So you support frivilous lawsuits that cost repairing bridges and roads, cuases hunger, allows government buildings to callapse and more. That's not what the 1st ammendment is about. That's what abuse of wealth is all about. But since it's done by your bunch, it' sokay. It's not okay and never was or ever will be. WE, the tax payer, ended up footing that bill. In the end, nothing was changed since it ended up being States Rights under the 10th Amendment and the 1st amendment had nothing to do with it.; It's a shame that we don't have a Loser Pays. A couple of losses like that and the NRA wold be bankrupt.

So, you may call us stupid but we got sick and tired of mass shootings and wholesale murder. It might work where you are and more power to you. Just stay away from here. I realize that if you were to move here, the IQ qould go up where yoou live now but the IQ here would go down.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

The AR 15 operates exactly like every other semiautomatic rifle that is available to civilians

How many times do you have to be told that the only difference between the AR and any other rifle of the same caliber is cosmetic and cosmetic only?

I've gone into the gun afficianado magazines and read many articles that explain why the AR is so popular. Being a gun nut, I'm sure you realize why they are so popular. So don't try telling me it's only that it looks cooler. I know better.

--------------------------------------------------- AR's are LEGAL Guns and though i don't care about hunting too much anymore AR's are legal for ALL Lawful purposes OldLADY .

It all dpends on the locality. In some areas, the AR is banned. Just not where I am from. It's a States and Local rights thing.

 

[2aguy]

I don't care if it's pink and wears panties. Regardless of what it looks like, its function makes it totally inappropriate for civilian ownership. We are NOT at war; the AR was modeled directly on the M16 (which is why it looks like one) and has one purpose. People don't use it to hunt; they use it play Rambo.

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

I sometimes question that as well. But I think it should be left up to the Local Governments and outlaw the NRA from spending Millions on trying to overturn the regulations that they don't think should happen. Right now, in this state, the NRA is a dirty word after spending millions in 2013 over lesser gun regulations that stood in court but it cost the state millions to defend against. It cost us money for schools, roads, bridges and more to pay for that boondoggle. It even mean 3 special elections where only one was a successful recall that was overturned on the very next election. The NRA isn't winning so well lately. The States are starting to stand on their own hind legs are are growing a pair.

Wow.... the stupid is strong with you....the NRA fights for our Right to keep and bear arms...and as a fascist, you want them outlawed from exercising their 1st Amendment Rights.....you really are the dumb fascist we always believed you to be....

So you support frivilous lawsuits that cost repairing bridges and roads, cuases hunger, allows government buildings to callapse and more. That's not what the 1st ammendment is about. That's what abuse of wealth is all about. But since it's done by your bunch, it' sokay. It's not okay and never was or ever will be. WE, the tax payer, ended up footing that bill. In the end, nothing was changed since it ended up being States Rights under the 10th Amendment and the 1st amendment had nothing to do with it.; It's a shame that we don't have a Loser Pays. A couple of losses like that and the NRA wold be bankrupt.

So, you may call us stupid but we got sick and tired of mass shootings and wholesale murder. It might work where you are and more power to you. Just stay away from here. I realize that if you were to move here, the IQ qould go up where yoou live now but the IQ here would go down.

They aren't frivolous law suits...they are protecting the Rights of citizens. You really are not a thinking person.....you are one of the people who would think Blacks should simply sit at the back of the bus, or not eat at the lunch counter because they are just using up tax payer money when the democrats went to court to stop them....that money, according to you would have been better spent on roads, so the Blacks should have just given up...

That is who you are...

 

[2aguy]

Other way around. The M-16 was modeled from the AR-15 Model 601 originally purchased by many third world countries and the USAF. The Army bought it but cheapened it up a bit to save money, used their own garbage dirty powder, didn't buy the cleaning kits that is supposed to be held in the stock but added a rail for the M-203 and the ability to use a Bayonet. Then they had Colt stamp M-16 on it instead of AR-15 Model 601. Believe it or not, the AR-15 semi auto predates the M-16 by about 5 years. The AR-15 Model 601 full auto predates the M-16 by almost 10 years. Outside of only a handful of parts, both the M-16, AR-15, and the AR-15 Model 601 is identical. And all three have seen combat.

That's interesting, Daryl. Thank you.
My point was that the AR was a gun designed for combat, modified a wee bit for civilian consumption. Your post underscores that point.

IMO, we have no call to own them.

The AR 15 operates exactly like every other semiautomatic rifle that is available to civilians

How many times do you have to be told that the only difference between the AR and any other rifle of the same caliber is cosmetic and cosmetic only?

I've gone into the gun afficianado magazines and read many articles that explain why the AR is so popular. Being a gun nut, I'm sure you realize why they are so popular. So don't try telling me it's only that it looks cooler. I know better.

--------------------------------------------------- AR's are LEGAL Guns and though i don't care about hunting too much anymore AR's are legal for ALL Lawful purposes OldLADY .

It all dpends on the locality. In some areas, the AR is banned. Just not where I am from. It's a States and Local rights thing.

Wrong...it is not a state and local issue as Heller v D.C. states...... a Right is not based on where you live.....that is why democrats didn't get away with denying Blacks the Right to vote simply because they lived in democrat controlled states....