A message from a veteran about firearms in this country

[Onyx]

It's not for that. It's there to remind other people that you have rights and what they are. It serves as a line in the sand to show the government what it can and cannot do. The 2nd Amendment is there to make enforcing that possible.

The government does not care about what a piece of paper says it can and cannot do.

You people are worthless sycophants that cannot protect jackshit, much less the people's right to bear arms.

 

[2aguy]

For those of you saying how you need your guns to defend against tyranny, guess what. Your AR15 won;t do shit to stop the carpet bombing of your house, or penetrate the armor of an M1 Abrams tank. This isn't call of duty.

You do realize that the backward ass barbarian terrorists made us leave Iraq, and Afghanistan using rifles and improvised explosives...right? And yet with 357 million guns in private hands, till the left takes them, you don't think we would do better.....

You aren't very bright are you?

 

[2aguy]

Funny that the "big Government liberals always forget that the majority of the military vote exclusively for the people who take care of them and have their back. That is CONSERVATIVES whether Democrat, or Republican, not liberal dim-ocrats. So IF a dim president tells the majority of Military Personnel to go into Ft. Worth and attack a group of ten thousand "good ole boys" think most of them will, Guess again That would be an UNLAWFULL ORDER, and it would be subject to the discretion of each soldier under the UCMJ Ask LT. Calley? Btw OPoster, Do you actually think ANY military group in the USA could get by with using even a tactical battlefield NUKE within our own borders, You apparently don't know too much about the CBR part of your training.

That is why the left, in the form of obama and hilary are allowing the military to fall apart....once normal, good Americans stop enlisting because the military is no longer the American military they respect....they will fill it with left wing borg drones who just follow orders mindlessly....like all the socialist miltiaries around the world........then we will have a problem......and that is why we have to keep our rifles....

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

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

The constitution says that "the people" as a whole are allowed to bear arms to form "well regulated militias"

Basically, there is a collective right for civilians to form an armed force to stand by in readiness to defend the country. The second amendment is therefore fulfilled by the existence of the U.S military

No, there is no collective right. You don't understand what you're reading.

The right to bear arms is the right of INDIVIDUALS to be in the militia. It's simple, the founding fathers said it loads of times and the right and left have ignored millions of times.

Okay, No Justice Bryer quotes allowed, but please post a quote from the constitution where in spicifically says only organized Milita can have guns?



The Second Amendment, as passed by the House and Senate and later ratified by the States, reads:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The hand-written copy of the Bill of Rights which hangs in the National Archives had slightly different capitalization and punctuation inserted by William Lambert, the scribe who prepared it. This copy reads:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Notice there is nothing about only state milita's being allowd, but also indeviduals.

All the gungrabbing Dhimmicrats need is five SCROTUS hacks like Stephen Breyer and the private right to have a gun is finished.

 

[Flash]

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.

No dumbass, it's what protects them form me right up until they try to be my master in more just their deluded dreams.
Who left the gate open and let all the communists out? I'm a Vietnam vet. I know interesting ways to deal with communists.

Epitaph on the Wall: PROUD TO DIE TAKING A RICH KID'S PLACE

All your Right Wing chickenhawk heroes had rich Daddies who got them to weasel out of serving in Vietnam. Real patriots would have formed up armed at prep-school graduations and marched the spoiled brats right over to the active-duty Induction Station. I don't care if you got a Medal of Honor in Vietnam; if you supported Dubya's privilege to get out of having to fight there, YOU HAVE NO HONOR.

We don't need a ruling class like the Clintons.

What we need is a system where if you don't pay the bills you don't get to make the rules.

Sound fair?

 

[ABikerSailor]

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.

No dumbass, it's what protects them form me right up until they try to be my master in more just their deluded dreams.
Who left the gate open and let all the communists out? I'm a Vietnam vet. I know interesting ways to deal with communists.

Epitaph on the Wall: PROUD TO DIE TAKING A RICH KID'S PLACE

All your Right Wing chickenhawk heroes had rich Daddies who got them to weasel out of serving in Vietnam. Real patriots would have formed up armed at prep-school graduations and marched the spoiled brats right over to the active-duty Induction Station. I don't care if you got a Medal of Honor in Vietnam; if you supported Dubya's privilege to get out of having to fight there, YOU HAVE NO HONOR.

We don't need a ruling class like the Clintons.

What we need is a system where if you don't pay the bills you don't get to make the rules.

Sound fair?

Would that include Trump? He hasn't paid any of the bills (taxes) in a very long time. If what you say is the way it should be, then why is Trump trying to be president?

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

The veteran is a moonbat. Some are. Yeah...and...?

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

Liar.

BTW, I have never heard anybody say they need an AR15 for hunting lol.
And I have never met a veteran who did not fully support the right of American civilians to pack weapons. Never.

So I know you're a lying piece of garbage who is pretending to be a soldier of honor. Despicable.

They're great for prairie dogs and wild hogs.

Not nearly enough steam on a .223 for me to want to try stopping a hog with it!

 

[Jarlaxle]

I'll take my bolt action 270 over those assault rifles any day.

Yeah, I have those too. However, at 1000 meters it's a toss up between my G3 and my Steyr SSG. And I can do an immediate reaquisition and fire with the G3. Can't do that with the SSG.

Use the right rifle, and you don't need to do that. (I prefer a .22-250 for that range.)

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Knives and slingshots are all the good folks need.....

 

[Jarlaxle]

My Remington 700 bolt is more than enough protection. Way more than enough. Gun kooky folk will disagree of course.

My evil eye and streets smarts is enough protection for me the past 51 years , my glock 9 mm is just for fun.

Oh yea and I have my blue pit.

.

If you wash your pits every once in awhile they won't stink or turn blue. Though I can see how the stick would keep people away and you protected.

Ya know I can see people's point about gun nuts they used to drive me crazy at my old job, so Fucking boring on how they had to carry all the time even going to walnart pfzzt please .

You could walk past my wife or my uncle, and you would never know that they were carrying!

 

[Jarlaxle]

Assault rifle owners bad shots. I understand those that can't shoot need more shots. I can outshoot them all.

Sober up.

 

[Flash]

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.

No dumbass, it's what protects them form me right up until they try to be my master in more just their deluded dreams.
Who left the gate open and let all the communists out? I'm a Vietnam vet. I know interesting ways to deal with communists.

Epitaph on the Wall: PROUD TO DIE TAKING A RICH KID'S PLACE

All your Right Wing chickenhawk heroes had rich Daddies who got them to weasel out of serving in Vietnam. Real patriots would have formed up armed at prep-school graduations and marched the spoiled brats right over to the active-duty Induction Station. I don't care if you got a Medal of Honor in Vietnam; if you supported Dubya's privilege to get out of having to fight there, YOU HAVE NO HONOR.

We don't need a ruling class like the Clintons.

What we need is a system where if you don't pay the bills you don't get to make the rules.

Sound fair?

Would that include Trump? He hasn't paid any of the bills (taxes) in a very long time. If what you say is the way it should be, then why is Trump trying to be president?

I am not voting for Trump so you can go bark up another tree.

By the way, do you pay any taxes?

If so do you take legal deductions?

You are not one of the greedy little Libtards that think you are entitled to deductions but other people aren't, are you?

 

[Jarlaxle]

A bolt action is far superior to ANY assault rifle. A N Y

I'll take an M1 Garand.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Any person who can shoot scraps assault rifle for real rifle...bolt.

You mean like the people that have made verified hits at half a mile...with an AR?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

And only one knife and one slingshot, to be FAIR

 

[9thIDdoc]

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.

No dumbass, it's what protects them form me right up until they try to be my master in more just their deluded dreams.
Who left the gate open and let all the communists out? I'm a Vietnam vet. I know interesting ways to deal with communists.

Epitaph on the Wall: PROUD TO DIE TAKING A RICH KID'S PLACE

All your Right Wing chickenhawk heroes had rich Daddies who got them to weasel out of serving in Vietnam. Real patriots would have formed up armed at prep-school graduations and marched the spoiled brats right over to the active-duty Induction Station. I don't care if you got a Medal of Honor in Vietnam; if you supported Dubya's privilege to get out of having to fight there, YOU HAVE NO HONOR.

You would do well to post on subjects with which you have at least a tiny bit of knowledge. Obviously "honor" isn't one of them.
"Dubya" served during the Vietnam era and could been assigned to a combat unit. If you haven't served you haven't earned the right to question his service in my opinion. His father saw combat during WWII. I was inducted and served in the place of dishonorable cowardly assholes who bugged out to Canada. From the above it appears you approve of such dishonorable behavior. You are, of course correct, that not all who serve do so honorably. John Kerry is the obvious example.

 

[Jarlaxle]

At 600 yards I win...open sights.

Actually, there is an off the shelf "assault rifle" (an AR-pattern chambered in .308, made by Smith & Wesson) that can regularly hit out to 800 yards. It is also fair at 1000, and even did fairly well out past 3/4 of a mile.

 

[9thIDdoc]

It's not for that. It's there to remind other people that you have rights and what they are. It serves as a line in the sand to show the government what it can and cannot do. The 2nd Amendment is there to make enforcing that possible.

The government does not care about what a piece of paper says it can and cannot do.

You people are worthless sycophants that cannot protect jackshit, much less the people's right to bear arms.

Untrue and the government knows better as do the knowledgeable populace.

 

[9thIDdoc]

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

The constitution says that "the people" as a whole are allowed to bear arms to form "well regulated militias"

Basically, there is a collective right for civilians to form an armed force to stand by in readiness to defend the country. The second amendment is therefore fulfilled by the existence of the U.S military

No, there is no collective right. You don't understand what you're reading.

The right to bear arms is the right of INDIVIDUALS to be in the militia. It's simple, the founding fathers said it loads of times and the right and left have ignored millions of times.

Okay, No Justice Bryer quotes allowed, but please post a quote from the constitution where in spicifically says only organized Milita can have guns?



The Second Amendment, as passed by the House and Senate and later ratified by the States, reads:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The hand-written copy of the Bill of Rights which hangs in the National Archives had slightly different capitalization and punctuation inserted by William Lambert, the scribe who prepared it. This copy reads:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Notice there is nothing about only state milita's being allowd, but also indeviduals.

All the gungrabbing Dhimmicrats need is five SCROTUS hacks like Stephen Breyer and the private right to have a gun is finished.

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

The constitution says that "the people" as a whole are allowed to bear arms to form "well regulated militias"

Basically, there is a collective right for civilians to form an armed force to stand by in readiness to defend the country. The second amendment is therefore fulfilled by the existence of the U.S military

No, there is no collective right. You don't understand what you're reading.

The right to bear arms is the right of INDIVIDUALS to be in the militia. It's simple, the founding fathers said it loads of times and the right and left have ignored millions of times.

Okay, No Justice Bryer quotes allowed, but please post a quote from the constitution where in spicifically says only organized Milita can have guns?



The Second Amendment, as passed by the House and Senate and later ratified by the States, reads:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The hand-written copy of the Bill of Rights which hangs in the National Archives had slightly different capitalization and punctuation inserted by William Lambert, the scribe who prepared it. This copy reads:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Notice there is nothing about only state milita's being allowd, but also indeviduals.

All the gungrabbing Dhimmicrats need is five SCROTUS hacks like Stephen Breyer and the private right to have a gun is finished.

Wrong. The Supreme Court is as subject to the Constitution as the rest of Government.