Comparing the AR with other Legal Firearms

[Winston]

as soon as you get the constitution changed we can talk,, until then fuck off,,,

Assault weapons can be banned per Heller, so YOU FUCK OFF needledick.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Again, if the previous assault weapons ban was no big deal, then we go back to it. I am fine with that.

1: The 1994 AWB accomplished nothing (see below)
2: A ban on any class of bearable arms - like 'assault weapons' - violates the constitution.

In the years after the assault weapons ban went into effect, the number of deaths from mass shootings fell, and the increase in the annual number of incidents slowed down.

Post hoc fallacy.
The 1994 AWB did not reduce access to 'assault weapons'
The expiration of the 1994 AWB did not increase acess to 'assault wepaons'
Thus
The 1994 AWB, or its expiration, had o effect on shootings , mass or otherwise.

 

[M14 Shooter]

One in twenty ain't "typically possessed".

Caetano v Massachusetts
The threshold is about 200,000.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Assault weapons can be banned per Heller, so YOU FUCK OFF needledick.

^^^^
This is a statement of ignorance or dishonesty.
And petulance.

 

[progressive hunter]

"that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns.”
“nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of firearms,”

The Heller Decision and Individual Right to Firearms

www.law.cornell.edu

Poll: One in Twenty Americans Own an AR-15​

Poll: One in Twenty Americans Own an AR-15

Tens of millions of Americans own an AR-15.

thereload.com

One in twenty ain't "typically possessed".

just because some politician cant read and makes a decision thats wrong doesnt mean its right,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

Assault weapons can be banned per Heller, so YOU FUCK OFF needledick.

and that violates the 2nd A,,,


OH,, whats an assault weapon??

 

[Winston]

just because some politician cant read and makes a decision thats wrong doesnt mean its right,,,

Those quotes are from Scalia in the Heller opinion.

 

[Winston]

^^^^
This is a statement of ignorance or dishonesty.
And petulance.

Backed by quotes from the Heller decision. Your position is backed by what, your big head?

 

[Winston]

Caetano v Massachusetts
The threshold is about 200,000.

Great, you can have a stun gun.

The facts in this case do not necessarily stand as a definite constitutional declaration.

The Second Amendment expands, but maybe not by much - SCOTUSblog

Reopening, for the first time in eight years, the always heated controversy over what the Second Amendment means, the Supreme Court on Monday sent the states and Congress an uncertain message, but one that seemed to caution against putting new or different kinds of weapons beyond the people's right

www.scotusblog.com

 

[progressive hunter]

Those quotes are from Scalia in the Heller opinion.

fuck scalia,, he needs to learn to read simple english,,,

 

[Winston]

1: The 1994 AWB accomplished nothing (see below)
2: A ban on any class of bearable arms - like 'assault weapons' - violates the constitution.

Post hoc fallacy.
The 1994 AWB did not reduce access to 'assault weapons'
The expiration of the 1994 AWB did not increase acess to 'assault wepaons'
Thus
The 1994 AWB, or its expiration, had o effect on shootings , mass or otherwise.

I have posted the statistics, both frequency of mass shootings and number of deaths declined during the assault weapons ban, and shot up immediately after its sunset. What you got?

 

[Flash]

Again, if the previous assault weapons ban was no big deal, then we go back to it. I am fine with that. And again, another gun nut fabricating shit, because they can't make a solid argument against an assault weapons ban. Because yes, the previous assault weapons ban did provide results.

Did the assault weapons ban of 1994 bring down mass shootings? Here’s what the data tells us

Analysis of the 10 years in which the US banned sales of assault weapons shows that it correlates with a drop in mass shooting deaths – a trend that reversed as soon as the ban expired.

theconversation.com

In the years after the assault weapons ban went into effect, the number of deaths from mass shootings fell, and the increase in the annual number of incidents slowed down. Even including 1999’s Columbine High School massacre – the deadliest mass shooting during the period of the ban – the 1994 to 2004 period saw lower average annual rates of both mass shootings and deaths resulting from such incidents than before the ban’s inception.

Think McFly, think!

How could the downward rate be attributed to a ban that did nothing more than remove bayonet lugs and a couple of other cosmetic items?

Right in the middle of the ban I went to a FFL and bought a Colt AR. The only difference between it and a preban AR was that it did not have a bayonet lug and had a permanent flash hider.

How did those two minor changes prevent me from using the rifle in a crime?

 

[progressive hunter]

What you got?

the CDC report that says between 500K and 3 million violent crimes are stopped each yr by guns,,,

 

[Winston]

the CDC report that says between 500K and 3 million violent crimes are stopped each yr by guns,,,

I am going to need a link hoss.

Scant evidence that defensive gun use saves lives

House Democrats are moving forward with a bill that would enact new restrictions on guns. During a recent hearing, Repub

www.politifact.com

 

[progressive hunter]

I am going to need a link hoss.

Scant evidence that defensive gun use saves lives

House Democrats are moving forward with a bill that would enact new restrictions on guns. During a recent hearing, Repub

www.politifact.com

if you dont know that one by now you shouldnt be discussing this topic,,

 

[Winston]

Think McFly, think!

How could the downward rate be attributed to a ban that did nothing more than remove bayonet lugs and a couple of other cosmetic items?

Right in the middle of the ban I went to a FFL and bought a Colt AR. The only difference between it and a preban AR was that it did not have a bayonet lug and had a permanent flash hider.

How did those two minor changes prevent me from using the rifle in a crime?

For the third time, I got no problem with returning to the old ban.

 

[progressive hunter]

I am going to need a link hoss.

Scant evidence that defensive gun use saves lives

House Democrats are moving forward with a bill that would enact new restrictions on guns. During a recent hearing, Repub

www.politifact.com

the reason your link is BS is because of the word games it plays on,,,

the stat says stops violent crimes,, well mass shootings are a violent crime,,

so yeah 600??? people got killed,, but how many would it have been in most cases where armed guards were not there, that there was an armed guard??

same applies to personal defense,,

 

[Flash]

For the third time, I got no problem with returning to the old ban.

For the second time. Tell me what the ban did that specifically lowered crime as you claimed. Tell me how not having a bayonet lug on my 1998 Colt AR-15 did anything to lower crime.

 

[Winston]

if you dont know that one by now you shouldnt be discussing this topic,,

Oh, I know it and know it well. They call up Billy Bob and asks him if he has ever used his gun to defend himself against a criminal in the last six months. Billy Bob goes, "Hell yeah I did, just a couple of months ago--it was really two years ago--I heared this noise outside and I drug Besse out from under the bed, Besse is my 12 guage double barreled shotgun that I keep loaded right under my bed. I jumped out the back door and heard movement out toward the woods and let go with both barrels. I hit somebody too, but they managed to creep away."

In reality, the noise was tree branches brushing up against a window. No one was there and no one was shot. In fact, if every person in that study really did "hit somebody" local emergency rooms would have been overwhelmed. Funny how all the criminals that were shot also managed to heal without medical help. The study is sheer bullshit.

 

[Leo123]

All I know is that the 'scary' criminal will have a 'scary' AR, and I want one too.