A message from a veteran about firearms in this country

[peach174]

I hope he's one of the liberals who tries....

Liberals get other people to do their dirty work. They talk big and are quite free with your money but they need government to carry out their wet dreams.

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

Bullshit. You swore and oath to obey all lawful orders. Obviously unconstitutional orders are not lawful. You also swore to defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. You sound an awful lot like a domestic enemy so (to put it language you might understand) don't be surprised if someone busts a cap in your ass if you try fucking around with an American's Constitutional rights.

Forget it.
You're talking to someone who doesn't even understand why Amercans need AK 47's near the Mexican Border, because that is exactly what the drug cartel and human traffickers use.
Another uninformed indoctrinated American.

Obama certainly made sure the cartels were well armed.

Sure did !

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The fact that we don't just ask whether a proposed bill is good for the country and that's all we have to decide, but first we have to ask whether it is Constitutional proves that being obstructed by a Constitution is not good for the country

Actually it is excellent proof of just the opposite. It helps stop legislation that only benefits a particular agenda rather than the Country as a whole. Don't like what the Constitution says? People can change it if enough agree. Be advised that there are many Americans sworn to defend the Constitution.

A Scrap of 18th Century Government Paper Doesn't Give You Your Gun Rights

What a slave you are to whatever the Establishment tells you to believe. The Constitution was set up to promote the particular agenda of the ruling class. In a free, self-determining country, it would have been a temporary start-up document, to be superseded by all subsequent legislation.

Many doctors take the Hippocratic Oath; does that mean they believe in the Greek god of healing? Swearing to defend the Constitution is just a metaphor for defending our country. Notice that the spawn of the ruling class hardly ever have to defend our country, but the Chickenhawks are the loudest at defending their totalitarian Constitution. Nobody bullies a free man, and the Constitution is just for plutocratic bullies and their sissy buttboys.

There is not now, nor has there ever been, anything "metaphorical" about the Constitution. It was the framework around which the nation was formed and serves as the supreme law that governs the government (ie "ruling class). It is designed to make the average citizen the actual ruling class and gun rights are there to enforce and defend the Constitution (not the government) .

Sheep Goosestepping Behind Chickenhawks

If you say so, faithfully repeating your Masters' fairy tales. You are a mind slave of the very ruling class that tells you that a document controlled by their own interpretations of it protects you from them.

 

[RealDave]

Didn't you take an oath to defend the Constitution? Do you happen to know what it says? JW

You can't be armed unless you have an AR-15?

 

[Flash]

I am a veteran of the United States Army. I served as a 12B (Combat Engineer) in the 37th Engineer Battalion, part of the illustrious 82nd Airborne Division

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield. When we trained with our weapons, we had to shoot a "qualification" test. We were presented with forty popup targets, one after another at different distances, from fifty to three hundred meters, all in very quick succession. We had to kill at least twenty three targets to pass the test, but most of us, including those of us who never fired a gun before, easily shot thirty or more targets. All this was in the span of less than two minutes, and we even had to reload once in that time. I don't get why any civilian needs to kill thirty people in two minutes, unless he is deliberately causing carnage and mass death.

The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name. The only difference is that it does not have burst capacity. That is not nearly as big a difference as the NRA makes it out to be. We never, ever used burst mode in the military, since it wasted ammo, was inaccurate, and generally useless. Besides for that difference, the AR 15 is the exact same as the M4. The M4's features are designed to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, including a detachable magazine which allows for rapid reloading and a buffer tube and muzzle brake which dampens recoil, so that a shooter can fire off a large number of rounds with minimal affect on accuracy.

All the arguments about " I need my AR 15 for hunting" or "I need my Ar15 for self defense" are entirely ridiculous. The 5.56 Nato round, which the Ar15 uses, is designed to pierce body armor. Which deer wears body armor? And your fantasies about shooting fifteen home invaders at once is just that: a fantasy which will likely never happen. The only real purpose of the AR 15 in American society is to kill large numbers of clubgoers, schoolchildren, or innocent bystanders at a time.

And for those of you who claim that "my Ar15 will protect me from tyranny," guess what, you're wrong. In my time in the military, I saw that no civilian rebellion would ever stand a chance against us. We have M1 Abrams tanks which can survive multiple rocket hits. We have drones which can bomb your house while being controlled by a person a thousand miles away. If worst came to worst, we have nuclear weapons which can quickly bring a seceding city or state into the stone age.

let's also talk about concealed carry. You are civilians. You are not deployed to a foreign country halfway around the globe. You are not fighting basically an entire for the sake of securing their oil supplies. You are not under constant threat of attack from people defending their homes from foreign invaders.

Therefore, you have no reason to carry a gun in public. Nobody needs to carry a handgun into mcDonald's or into a bank. You are not in a war zone.

And don;t give me the bs that concealed carry decreases crime. It has been proven, by STANFORD UNIVERSITY, that concealed carry actually INCREASES violent crime:

Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

Trust me, I used to be an NRA member myself when i was 18. I bought into the propaganda because i was stupid, uninformed, and thought it was fun to play with guns. After joining the military, I learned to treat firearms, especially assault rifles, as tools of death and destruction, something which should be kept out of most civilian hands.

The right wing claims to respect veterans, so please listen to the words of a former soldier. I trained with assault rifles. I carried an assault rifle as part of my job. I can tell you that the military M-4 and the Ar-15 are nearly identical, and that no civilian needs a weapon designed to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes.

If you don't want a firearms then don't own one.

Leave my Constitutional rights alone.

If you served in the military then you swore to uphold the Constitution. Go read ot before you go shooting off your mouth.

 

[ChairmanGonzalo]

I am a veteran of the United States Army. I served as a 12B (Combat Engineer) in the 37th Engineer Battalion, part of the illustrious 82nd Airborne Division

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield. When we trained with our weapons, we had to shoot a "qualification" test. We were presented with forty popup targets, one after another at different distances, from fifty to three hundred meters, all in very quick succession. We had to kill at least twenty three targets to pass the test, but most of us, including those of us who never fired a gun before, easily shot thirty or more targets. All this was in the span of less than two minutes, and we even had to reload once in that time. I don't get why any civilian needs to kill thirty people in two minutes, unless he is deliberately causing carnage and mass death.

The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name. The only difference is that it does not have burst capacity. That is not nearly as big a difference as the NRA makes it out to be. We never, ever used burst mode in the military, since it wasted ammo, was inaccurate, and generally useless. Besides for that difference, the AR 15 is the exact same as the M4. The M4's features are designed to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, including a detachable magazine which allows for rapid reloading and a buffer tube and muzzle brake which dampens recoil, so that a shooter can fire off a large number of rounds with minimal affect on accuracy.

All the arguments about " I need my AR 15 for hunting" or "I need my Ar15 for self defense" are entirely ridiculous. The 5.56 Nato round, which the Ar15 uses, is designed to pierce body armor. Which deer wears body armor? And your fantasies about shooting fifteen home invaders at once is just that: a fantasy which will likely never happen. The only real purpose of the AR 15 in American society is to kill large numbers of clubgoers, schoolchildren, or innocent bystanders at a time.

And for those of you who claim that "my Ar15 will protect me from tyranny," guess what, you're wrong. In my time in the military, I saw that no civilian rebellion would ever stand a chance against us. We have M1 Abrams tanks which can survive multiple rocket hits. We have drones which can bomb your house while being controlled by a person a thousand miles away. If worst came to worst, we have nuclear weapons which can quickly bring a seceding city or state into the stone age.

let's also talk about concealed carry. You are civilians. You are not deployed to a foreign country halfway around the globe. You are not fighting basically an entire for the sake of securing their oil supplies. You are not under constant threat of attack from people defending their homes from foreign invaders.

Therefore, you have no reason to carry a gun in public. Nobody needs to carry a handgun into mcDonald's or into a bank. You are not in a war zone.

And don;t give me the bs that concealed carry decreases crime. It has been proven, by STANFORD UNIVERSITY, that concealed carry actually INCREASES violent crime:

Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

Trust me, I used to be an NRA member myself when i was 18. I bought into the propaganda because i was stupid, uninformed, and thought it was fun to play with guns. After joining the military, I learned to treat firearms, especially assault rifles, as tools of death and destruction, something which should be kept out of most civilian hands.

The right wing claims to respect veterans, so please listen to the words of a former soldier. I trained with assault rifles. I carried an assault rifle as part of my job. I can tell you that the military M-4 and the Ar-15 are nearly identical, and that no civilian needs a weapon designed to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes.

If you don't want a firearms then don't own one.

Leave my Constitutional rights alone.

If you served in the military then you swore to uphold the Constitution. Go read ot before you go shooting off your mouth.

I swore to defend the constitution, but the constitution can easily be changed.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I am a veteran of the United States Army. I served as a 12B (Combat Engineer) in the 37th Engineer Battalion, part of the illustrious 82nd Airborne Division

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield. When we trained with our weapons, we had to shoot a "qualification" test. We were presented with forty popup targets, one after another at different distances, from fifty to three hundred meters, all in very quick succession. We had to kill at least twenty three targets to pass the test, but most of us, including those of us who never fired a gun before, easily shot thirty or more targets. All this was in the span of less than two minutes, and we even had to reload once in that time. I don't get why any civilian needs to kill thirty people in two minutes, unless he is deliberately causing carnage and mass death.

The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name. The only difference is that it does not have burst capacity. That is not nearly as big a difference as the NRA makes it out to be. We never, ever used burst mode in the military, since it wasted ammo, was inaccurate, and generally useless. Besides for that difference, the AR 15 is the exact same as the M4. The M4's features are designed to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, including a detachable magazine which allows for rapid reloading and a buffer tube and muzzle brake which dampens recoil, so that a shooter can fire off a large number of rounds with minimal affect on accuracy.

All the arguments about " I need my AR 15 for hunting" or "I need my Ar15 for self defense" are entirely ridiculous. The 5.56 Nato round, which the Ar15 uses, is designed to pierce body armor. Which deer wears body armor? And your fantasies about shooting fifteen home invaders at once is just that: a fantasy which will likely never happen. The only real purpose of the AR 15 in American society is to kill large numbers of clubgoers, schoolchildren, or innocent bystanders at a time.

And for those of you who claim that "my Ar15 will protect me from tyranny," guess what, you're wrong. In my time in the military, I saw that no civilian rebellion would ever stand a chance against us. We have M1 Abrams tanks which can survive multiple rocket hits. We have drones which can bomb your house while being controlled by a person a thousand miles away. If worst came to worst, we have nuclear weapons which can quickly bring a seceding city or state into the stone age.

let's also talk about concealed carry. You are civilians. You are not deployed to a foreign country halfway around the globe. You are not fighting basically an entire for the sake of securing their oil supplies. You are not under constant threat of attack from people defending their homes from foreign invaders.

Therefore, you have no reason to carry a gun in public. Nobody needs to carry a handgun into mcDonald's or into a bank. You are not in a war zone.

And don;t give me the bs that concealed carry decreases crime. It has been proven, by STANFORD UNIVERSITY, that concealed carry actually INCREASES violent crime:

Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

Trust me, I used to be an NRA member myself when i was 18. I bought into the propaganda because i was stupid, uninformed, and thought it was fun to play with guns. After joining the military, I learned to treat firearms, especially assault rifles, as tools of death and destruction, something which should be kept out of most civilian hands.

The right wing claims to respect veterans, so please listen to the words of a former soldier. I trained with assault rifles. I carried an assault rifle as part of my job. I can tell you that the military M-4 and the Ar-15 are nearly identical, and that no civilian needs a weapon designed to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes.

If you don't want a firearms then don't own one.

Leave my Constitutional rights alone.

If you served in the military then you swore to uphold the Constitution. Go read ot before you go shooting off your mouth.

I swore to defend the constitution, but the constitution can easily be changed.

Not to pick nits there Gonzalo, but you should have said that the constitution can be changed by a simple process rather than saying it can easily be changed.

Simple means there's not much to it, and to change the Constitution, all you have to do is get 3/4ths of the States to agree to it, and boom.............it's changed.

However................getting 3/4ths of Americans to agree on anything today isn't easy. It's one of the more difficult tasks one could possibly undertake.

 

[Kondor3]

...I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle...

"...that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..."

Next contestant, please.

 

[Wyatt earp]

All this talk is for nothing. Guns are a Constitutional right. Deal with it, losers.

Not for long.The supreme court is gonna be at full strength again, and the person doing the appointing won't be Trump. The 5-4 majority in favor of the nra in 2008 will be reversed.

The NRA? You truly are stupid. Regardless of any court rulings, you'd have to confiscate 300 million firearms. Who's going to do it?

I hope he's one of the liberals who tries....

Liberals get other people to do their dirty work. They talk big and are quite free with your money but they need government to carry out their wet dreams.

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

Lmao....

 

[TNHarley]

Not for long.The supreme court is gonna be at full strength again, and the person doing the appointing won't be Trump. The 5-4 majority in favor of the nra in 2008 will be reversed.

The NRA? You truly are stupid. Regardless of any court rulings, you'd have to confiscate 300 million firearms. Who's going to do it?

I hope he's one of the liberals who tries....

Liberals get other people to do their dirty work. They talk big and are quite free with your money but they need government to carry out their wet dreams.

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

Lmao....

He's a terrible liar

 

[ABikerSailor]

All this talk is for nothing. Guns are a Constitutional right. Deal with it, losers.

Not for long.The supreme court is gonna be at full strength again, and the person doing the appointing won't be Trump. The 5-4 majority in favor of the nra in 2008 will be reversed.

The NRA? You truly are stupid. Regardless of any court rulings, you'd have to confiscate 300 million firearms. Who's going to do it?

I hope he's one of the liberals who tries....

Liberals get other people to do their dirty work. They talk big and are quite free with your money but they need government to carry out their wet dreams.

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

Hate to tell you Gonzalo, but 9thIDoc is right...........you are expected to carry out the orders of those appointed above you, but if they give you an unlawful order, you have the right, as well as the obligation, to refuse to carry out the order.

If my Division Officer, Captain, or anyone else told me to round up all weapons from the civilian population without just cause for their removal, I'd have to tell them respectfully that I won't do that because it's against the 2nd Amendment, which outranks them. But, that's because I know what rights citizens do and don't have.

But, I also agree with you, why do you need to be able to put more than 10 rounds downrange before reloading? Are you that bad of a shot?

I personally believe that a person should be able to have as many bolt action rifles, and as many pistols that fire less than 15 rounds at a time as they want.

However..............high capacity magazines? Nope. They're really not needed outside of a combat zone.

 

[Wyatt earp]

The NRA? You truly are stupid. Regardless of any court rulings, you'd have to confiscate 300 million firearms. Who's going to do it?

I hope he's one of the liberals who tries....

Liberals get other people to do their dirty work. They talk big and are quite free with your money but they need government to carry out their wet dreams.

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

Lmao....

He's a terrible liar

I know a little 25 year old brat ( (doubt if he even is that old) who has yet to grow up an pay taxes, get married, have kids, have a mortgage....



.

 

[TNHarley]

Not for long.The supreme court is gonna be at full strength again, and the person doing the appointing won't be Trump. The 5-4 majority in favor of the nra in 2008 will be reversed.

The NRA? You truly are stupid. Regardless of any court rulings, you'd have to confiscate 300 million firearms. Who's going to do it?

I hope he's one of the liberals who tries....

Liberals get other people to do their dirty work. They talk big and are quite free with your money but they need government to carry out their wet dreams.

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

Hate to tell you Gonzalo, but 9thIDoc is right...........you are expected to carry out the orders of those appointed above you, but if they give you an unlawful order, you have the right, as well as the obligation, to refuse to carry out the order.

If my Division Officer, Captain, or anyone else told me to round up all weapons from the civilian population without just cause for their removal, I'd have to tell them respectfully that I won't do that because it's against the 2nd Amendment, which outranks them. But, that's because I know what rights citizens do and don't have.

But, I also agree with you, why do you need to be able to put more than 10 rounds downrange before loading? Are you that bad of a shot?

I personally believe that a person should be able to have as many bolt action rifles, and as many pistols that fire less than 15 rounds at a time as they want.

However..............high capacity magazines? Nope. They're really not needed outside of a combat zone.

I was with you until you started detailing with the main point of the second.. At least IMO

 

[williepete]

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

Bullshit. You were kicked out after 180 days for fraudulent enlistment and walked away with an other than honorable discharge. That will follow you t'ill the end of your days.

Blindly obeying illegal orders is a crime. Had you paid attention while they were teaching you this in basic training, you wouldn't post such drivel. But go ahead and run with that. It worked so well for Generals Jodl and Keitel.

 

[SAYIT]

...I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle...

I need my guns because I don't trust comrades like you, Chairman. If you don't want me to have them don't send anyone else ... come get them yourself.

 

[Flash]

I swore to defend the constitution, but the constitution can easily be changed.

Until it is change then defend the one we have that says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

Bullshit. You were kicked out after 180 days for fraudulent enlistment and walked away with an other than honorable discharge. That will follow you t'ill the end of your days.

Blindly obeying illegal orders is a crime. Had you paid attention while they were teaching you this in basic training, you wouldn't post such drivel. But go ahead and run with that. It worked so well for Generals Jodl and Keitel.

You know Willie, I agree with your second paragraph, but I don't really like what you wrote in the first.

He said before in his post that while yeah, he was discharged after 6 months, he had a General Under Honorable Conditions, which basically means he did okay for the short time he was there, but they don't have any real way of evaluating him, which is why he got a GUHC.

And no...............a GUHC doesn't have much impact on getting a job later. It's the ones below that where people have problems.

And..............while you may have little regard for their opinions, please don't disparage another person's service, no matter the duration of it, as long as there is "honorable" attached to their discharge. It could have been medical, it could have been previously undisclosed medical conditions (his was), or it could have been just about anything. GUHC is a VERY broad discharge type, meaning it covers a lot of different situations.

I know. I was a US Navy Personnelman for 20 years. And while I may take pot shots at someones views or politics, I never disparage another person's service.

Not even SCPO Pollock, who I find to be a perfectly reprehensible human being, but he served, so I leave his service alone.

His opinions and views on the other hand? Open season on them.

I wish people could talk intelligently about ideas rather than tearing down other posters.

 

[Divine Wind]

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

A real veteran knows they swear an oath to the Constitution, not any particular person, and that any orders given have to be lawful orders.

No doubt someone like you would follow orders to line up RWers against a wall and shoot them, but most American military personnel would not follow such clearly unlawful orders.

 

[Flash]

But, I also agree with you, why do you need to be able to put more than 10 rounds downrange before reloading? Are you that bad of a shot?

I personally believe that a person should be able to have as many bolt action rifles, and as many pistols that fire less than 15 rounds at a time as they want.

However..............high capacity magazines? Nope. They're really not needed outside of a combat zone.

Who are you to tell me how many rounds I can have in a magazine?

If you want less than 15 rounds then fine. What I have is none of your business.

 

[williepete]

I am a military veteran. When I enlisted, I swore an oath to obey orders from all who were appointed over me. If the commander in chief orders the confiscation of civilian firearms, as an order, it must be carried out in accordance with the oath of loyalty we swore.

Bullshit. You were kicked out after 180 days for fraudulent enlistment and walked away with an other than honorable discharge. That will follow you t'ill the end of your days.

Blindly obeying illegal orders is a crime. Had you paid attention while they were teaching you this in basic training, you wouldn't post such drivel. But go ahead and run with that. It worked so well for Generals Jodl and Keitel.

You know Willie, I agree with your second paragraph, but I don't really like what you wrote in the first.

He said before in his post that while yeah, he was discharged after 6 months, he had a General Under Honorable Conditions, which basically means he did okay for the short time he was there, but they don't have any real way of evaluating him, which is why he got a GUHC.

And no...............a GUHC doesn't have much impact on getting a job later. It's the ones below that where people have problems.

And..............while you may have little regard for their opinions, please don't disparage another person's service, no matter the duration of it, as long as there is "honorable" attached to their discharge. It could have been medical, it could have been previously undisclosed medical conditions (his was), or it could have been just about anything. GUHC is a VERY broad discharge type, meaning it covers a lot of different situations.

I know. I was a US Navy Personnelman for 20 years. And while I may take pot shots at someones views or politics, I never disparage another person's service.

Not even SCPO Pollock, who I find to be a perfectly reprehensible human being, but he served, so I leave his service alone.

His opinions and views on the other hand? Open season on them.

I wish people could talk intelligently about ideas rather than tearing down other posters.

You read too much into my post. Tap the brakes just a bit.

 

[Divine Wind]

Not even SCPO Pollock, who I find to be a perfectly reprehensible human being, but he served, so I leave his service alone.....

I strongly doubt he served. At least not as a SCPO. He doesn't walk the walk.

As for our young socialist, he bragged about being in the 82nd Airborne, but being in only 6 months means he probably hadn't even finished training before being discharged.