Free AR for Everyone?

[Pogo]

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

AR15's aren't military weapons they aren't issued by the military but can be used effectively

Whether the military uses them or not is irrelevant. It's a killing machine either way.

No...it isn't. It is a weapon meant to save the life of the user.

Firearms don't "save" lives, Dumbass. They END them.

Well, somebody needs to tell the cops and the military to disarm IMMEDIATELY!!!

Go ahead. Be my jest.

 

[Charles Guzinya]

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

The rifles that the public can legally posse are NOT an Armalite Rifle

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

AR15's aren't military weapons they aren't issued by the military but can be used effectively

Whether the military uses them or not is irrelevant. It's a killing machine either way.

No...it isn't. It is a weapon meant to save the life of the user.

Firearms don't "save" lives, Dumbass. They TAKE them.

It depends on how you look at it. I will gladly take a life to save my own.

And if you do ---- you still took a life. Ain't no way around that.

You said they don't save lives. That is an incorrect statement.

Kindly figure out what you are trying to say, but YOU ARE NOT TAKING MY WEAPONS. NO!

 

[Pogo]

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

The rifles that the public can legally posse are NOT an Armalite Rifle

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

AR15's aren't military weapons they aren't issued by the military but can be used effectively

Whether the military uses them or not is irrelevant. It's a killing machine either way.

No...it isn't. It is a weapon meant to save the life of the user.

Firearms don't "save" lives, Dumbass. They TAKE them.

It depends on how you look at it. I will gladly take a life to save my own.

And if you do ---- you still took a life. Ain't no way around that.

You said they don't save lives. That is an incorrect statement.

Kindly figure out what you are trying to say, but YOU ARE NOT TAKING MY WEAPONS. NO!

Hey feel free to join Bike-Boi in his hapless quest to find anywhere I've ever said anything about "taking" anybody's weapons. And when you come to the inevitable conclusion that it doesn't exist, learn how to read.

Oh and by the way I've already noted, from the beginning here, that I have no interest in weapons, yours or anyone else's including purchases or giveaways. In other words not only do I not want to take your guns, you literally couldn't PAY me to do it.

Yes I said they don't save lives -- they end them. That's the whole point of war technology. Of course if you can show me that time a speeding bullet jumped in front of the terrorizing car and diverted it to save those babies, I'll change my mind.

 

[danielpalos]

Right wingers should learn from history; insist on eminent domain first if necessary!

 

[Dragonlady]

AR 15s actually make for a poor SD weapon.

Handguns and shotguns are much more preferable.

You do know you are preaching to a cult, don't you. We broke that cult in Colorado but other states haven't even tried and the CultAR15 continues.

So you believe exercising a Constitutional right is akin to belonging to a cult ?

The unorganized militia has proven itself to be worthless to the security of our free States.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

You say that this like it's a bad thing. Guns are heavily restricted in Canada. Innocent civilians are seldom shot in Canada because the only people who have guns, are criminals. If the police turn up and somebody has a gun, he's a bad guy. There are no "good guys with guns" here, unless they're cops.

We have fewer murders, fewer shootings, and fewer shootings of unarmed civilians. We don't have as many shootings due to road rage, or two guys getting drunk in bars. Best of all, very few children are shot accidentally or otherwise. There are fewer domestic shootings or murders.

If guns kept you safe, the USA would be the safest country in the first world, instead of the most dangerous.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

AR 15s actually make for a poor SD weapon.

Handguns and shotguns are much more preferable.

You do know you are preaching to a cult, don't you. We broke that cult in Colorado but other states haven't even tried and the CultAR15 continues.

So you believe exercising a Constitutional right is akin to belonging to a cult ?

The unorganized militia has proven itself to be worthless to the security of our free States.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

You say that this like it's a bad thing. Guns are heavily restricted in Canada. Innocent civilians are seldom shot in Canada because the only people waho have guns, are criminals. If the police turn up and somebody has a gun, he's a bad guy. There are no "good guys with guns" here, unless they're cops.

We have fewer murders, fewer shootings, and fewer shootings of unarmed civilians. We don't have as many shootings due to road rage, or two guys getting drunk in bars. Best of all, very few children are shot accidentally or otherwise. There are fewer domestic shootings or murders.

If guns kept you safe, the USA would be the safest country in the first world, instead of the most dangerous.

You Canadians have never had an absolute right to own firearms so I don't give a shit about how safe you think you are.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

AR15's aren't military weapons they aren't issued by the military but can be used effectively

Whether the military uses them or not is irrelevant. It's a killing machine either way.

So is a car. A plane. Drink enough water and it can kill you.

BULLSHIT.

A car is made for transportation across land. A plane is made for transportation through the air. A gun is made for killing people. Don't sit on this board bleating "Up is Down" just because you find yourself in the position of having to defend the indefensible. You put yourself in that position, not me.

A gun is not a "killing machine" you know it, I know it, and so do may other people. You are putting on a "show" It is really comical. I am eating popcorn and laughing at you.

Actually what you're doing is surgically trying to remove your foot from your proverbial mouth. Or perhaps you'd like to essplain to the classs what functions a firearm has. Can you dig a trench with it? Can it make a phone call? Can it take you from Cleveland to Akron?

Oh no wait, that's what shovels, phones and cars do. It's what they're designed for. Diga me Tonto, what is a firearm designed for?

Good luck with that one. As I said you put yourself in that position. And a demonstration of how y'all gun nuts twist yourself into pretzels is the fact that Bootley agreed with me, then he agreed with you, even thought the two posts contradict each other. Y'all are all over the map with this fetish thing.

Here's a li'l tip for future posting --- If I thought you could refute my point.... I wouldn't have put it up there.

The majority of self defense with a gun.....saving lives.....happen with the gun never being fired.........it keeps the peace by preventing criminals from creating victims........

Guns are peace keeping tools...both domestically and against foreign enemies.

--- And it could not do that unless all parties involved understood that it's a killing machine, STUPID.

Go try to hold up the bank while pointing an eggplant at them. Let us know how far you get.

What a maroon.

I can hold up a bank using a spear gun.

 

[esalla]

Great plan.

1. Unlike "health care" or "education" the constitution states that right to arms should be guaranteed to all. What better way to guarantee that than have a free AR for everyone?

2. Everyone has a right to self defense and that can best be guaranteed by providing them an AR. Thousands die every year from not having their self defense needs met.

3. Gun prices have been steadily increasing and have become unaffordable. We need to make them affordable, the best way to proceed is a "single payer" option - whereby the government purchases everyone a firearm.

4. There are other nations where this is already done - in Switzerland everyone has an AR in the closet. The homicide rate in Switzerland is much lower than that of America, if you don't support the proposal, you are a murderer.

5. Myriads of other benefits. Lower administrative costs, improvement of US defensive capability, higher quality and better coverage (we of course let an American choose the firearm according to his needs). The list goes on and on. It is simply common sense.

Folks, no one should go without the means to defend themselves!

The AR is cheap obsolete shit

 

[Pogo]

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

AR15's aren't military weapons they aren't issued by the military but can be used effectively

Whether the military uses them or not is irrelevant. It's a killing machine either way.

So is a car. A plane. Drink enough water and it can kill you.

BULLSHIT.

A car is made for transportation across land. A plane is made for transportation through the air. A gun is made for killing people. Don't sit on this board bleating "Up is Down" just because you find yourself in the position of having to defend the indefensible. You put yourself in that position, not me.

A gun is not a "killing machine" you know it, I know it, and so do may other people. You are putting on a "show" It is really comical. I am eating popcorn and laughing at you.

Actually what you're doing is surgically trying to remove your foot from your proverbial mouth. Or perhaps you'd like to essplain to the classs what functions a firearm has. Can you dig a trench with it? Can it make a phone call? Can it take you from Cleveland to Akron?

Oh no wait, that's what shovels, phones and cars do. It's what they're designed for. Diga me Tonto, what is a firearm designed for?

Good luck with that one. As I said you put yourself in that position. And a demonstration of how y'all gun nuts twist yourself into pretzels is the fact that Bootley agreed with me, then he agreed with you, even thought the two posts contradict each other. Y'all are all over the map with this fetish thing.

Here's a li'l tip for future posting --- If I thought you could refute my point.... I wouldn't have put it up there.

The majority of self defense with a gun.....saving lives.....happen with the gun never being fired.........it keeps the peace by preventing criminals from creating victims........

Guns are peace keeping tools...both domestically and against foreign enemies.

--- And it could not do that unless all parties involved understood that it's a killing machine, STUPID.

Go try to hold up the bank while pointing an eggplant at them. Let us know how far you get.

What a maroon.

I can hold up a bank using a spear gun.

Indeed. But you can't make Eggplant Parmigiana out of that spear gun.

 

[San Souci]

="bigrebnc1775, post: 26197817, member: 23837"]

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

AR15's aren't military weapons they aren't issued by the military but can be used effectively

Whether the military uses them or not is irrelevant. It's a killing machine either way.

Yes they are as good a killing machine as the handler is
Why don't you come and take'em?

I have zero desirefor them, no more than I would come and take your raisins or your prunes or the Yugo you drive.

well then stop whining about something I own that is my property that has no harmed you

What "whining" is that? Linko, Blinko?

Fer fuxsake you just now showed up. I neither know nor care what the fuck you own.

It's whining when you call an inanimate object a killing machine.

Read back --- I invited the other yahoo to demonstrate what else it could be.

He ran away.

I tend to pose that kind of question.

On your mark..........

and I responded that it's as good a killing machine as the handler is therefore you are whining

This might come as news to those without brains but there is no "whining" in a simple description of what an object is.

I said absolutely zero about "handlers". Just as I said zero about "drivers", "diggers" or "callers". I described objects. As in what those objects are designed for.

youre right you arent whining,, youre having a mental breakdown cause knives and baseball bats kill far more people than guns outside of war,,,

so unless you want to take guns away from the military youre just whining,,,

Aagain ---- you can cut a package open with a knife or whittle a piece of wood. You can hit a double with a baseball bat. You could even whittle a piece of wood into a baseball bat.

That's what they're DESIGNED FOR. That is their PURPOSE.

and guns are designed for killing people or things that need killing,, in fact they are the perfect tool for it,, so unless you need killed whats your problem??

THANK YOU. That's what I've been saying the whole time.

You want "problems", go talk to the yahoos who can't handle definitions.

what you dont understand is a gun is a tool and is useless unless a human is using it,,, or a turkey in the trunk,,

just like any knife or baseball bat,,

And?

You want a gun ban because guns either have no value to YOU or because you want your commie revolution.

Do we have the right or not? Answer carefully.

Where did I say "I want a gun ban" shit-for-brains-who-can't-read?

Answer that.

WHERE?

QUOTE IT.

Look anywhere you want. This thread, any other thread, any time, ever, right back to the day I got here when that was the issue of the day. Look on other message boards. Anywhere you want.

Report back here to tell me how you fucked up.

If you are willing to ban one type of gun, for safety reasons, when that fails (it will), the logical flow is obvious.

You cannot be for banning one type of gun and not be, by implication, NOT for a ban on every other type.


Why don't you just list for us the guns you DON'T want to ban. This should be fun.

All "Temporary" Gov't mandates somehow become permanent. What did the USSR do in 1917? Took guns away. Took worship away. Cencored speech and NEWS. Regulated anything that could not be TAXED. See anything similar NOW?

 

[San Souci]

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

The rifles that the public can legally posse are NOT an Armalite Rifle

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

AR15's aren't military weapons they aren't issued by the military but can be used effectively

Whether the military uses them or not is irrelevant. It's a killing machine either way.

No...it isn't. It is a weapon meant to save the life of the user.

Firearms don't "save" lives, Dumbass. They TAKE them.

It depends on how you look at it. I will gladly take a life to save my own.

And if you do ---- you still took a life. Ain't no way around that.

You said they don't save lives. That is an incorrect statement.

Kindly figure out what you are trying to say, but YOU ARE NOT TAKING MY WEAPONS. NO!

They can kill looters. That is all that matters.

 

[justinacolmena]

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

If the AR-15 can be operated in fully automatic mode, and and a fully automatic rifle is an assault rife, why shouldn't the AR-15 be considered an “assault rifle”? Why should it matter if it is or isn't?

And why shouldn't ordinary citizens be allowed to possess the weapons they need or want to defend themselves from home invasion or military assault?

 

[Charles Guzinya]

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

The rifles that the public can legally posse are NOT an Armalite Rifle

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

AR15's aren't military weapons they aren't issued by the military but can be used effectively

Whether the military uses them or not is irrelevant. It's a killing machine either way.

No...it isn't. It is a weapon meant to save the life of the user.

Firearms don't "save" lives, Dumbass. They TAKE them.

It depends on how you look at it. I will gladly take a life to save my own.

And if you do ---- you still took a life. Ain't no way around that.

You said they don't save lives. That is an incorrect statement.

Kindly figure out what you are trying to say, but YOU ARE NOT TAKING MY WEAPONS. NO!

They can kill looters. That is all that matters.

True

 

[Charles Guzinya]

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

If the AR-15 can be operated in fully automatic mode, and and a fully automatic rifle is an assault rife, why shouldn't the AR-15 be considered an “assault rifle”? Why should it matter if it is or isn't?

And why shouldn't ordinary citizens be allowed to possess the weapons they need or want to defend themselves from home invasion or military assault?

You can own a fully automatic weapon. But it should not be as simple as todays Gun background check.
Therefore I still agree that the need for a fully automatic weapon should be for police or military only.


kindly apply for your class 3 license, and when granted, go purchase one.

Currently, these states allow private ownership of machineguns: AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, MA, ME, MD, MS, MT, ND, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, and WY.

 

[progressive hunter]

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

If the AR-15 can be operated in fully automatic mode, and and a fully automatic rifle is an assault rife, why shouldn't the AR-15 be considered an “assault rifle”? Why should it matter if it is or isn't?

And why shouldn't ordinary citizens be allowed to possess the weapons they need or want to defend themselves from home invasion or military assault?

You can own a fully automatic weapon. kindly apply for your class 3 license, and when granted, go purchase one.

Currently, these states allow private ownership of machineguns: AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, MA, ME, MD, MS, MT, ND, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, and WY.

thats an infringement on ownership and therefor a violation of the 2nd amendment,,,

 

[Charles Guzinya]

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

If the AR-15 can be operated in fully automatic mode, and and a fully automatic rifle is an assault rife, why shouldn't the AR-15 be considered an “assault rifle”? Why should it matter if it is or isn't?

And why shouldn't ordinary citizens be allowed to possess the weapons they need or want to defend themselves from home invasion or military assault?

You can own a fully automatic weapon. kindly apply for your class 3 license, and when granted, go purchase one.

Currently, these states allow private ownership of machineguns: AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, MA, ME, MD, MS, MT, ND, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, and WY.

thats an infringement on ownership and therefor a violation of the 2nd amendment,,,

voice your complaints to the ATF, not me. I DO NOT CARE IF YOU BELIVE IT IS A VIOLATION.

 

[progressive hunter]

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

If the AR-15 can be operated in fully automatic mode, and and a fully automatic rifle is an assault rife, why shouldn't the AR-15 be considered an “assault rifle”? Why should it matter if it is or isn't?

And why shouldn't ordinary citizens be allowed to possess the weapons they need or want to defend themselves from home invasion or military assault?

You can own a fully automatic weapon. kindly apply for your class 3 license, and when granted, go purchase one.

Currently, these states allow private ownership of machineguns: AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, MA, ME, MD, MS, MT, ND, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, and WY.

thats an infringement on ownership and therefor a violation of the 2nd amendment,,,

voice your complaints to the ATF, not me. I DO NOT CARE IF YOU BELIVE IT IS A VIOLATION.

there in lies the problem,,, you dont care about peoples rights and side with the tyrants ,,,

 

[Charles Guzinya]

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

The rifles that the public can legally posse are NOT an Armalite Rifle

That's military conscription. They issue the guns in the course of basic training, and then they take them back. U.S. military boots, military uniforms, military jackets, even military ammo, all widely available as U.S. military surplus -- but no, the Democrats will not allow combat rifles of the sort issued to private first class rank infantry to fall into the hands of private individuals or citizens outside the military.

AR15's aren't military weapons they aren't issued by the military but can be used effectively

Whether the military uses them or not is irrelevant. It's a killing machine either way.

No...it isn't. It is a weapon meant to save the life of the user.

Firearms don't "save" lives, Dumbass. They TAKE them.

It depends on how you look at it. I will gladly take a life to save my own.

And if you do ---- you still took a life. Ain't no way around that.

You said they don't save lives. That is an incorrect statement.

Kindly figure out what you are trying to say, but YOU ARE NOT TAKING MY WEAPONS. NO!

Hey feel free to join Bike-Boi in his hapless quest to find anywhere I've ever said anything about "taking" anybody's weapons. And when you come to the inevitable conclusion that it doesn't exist, learn how to read.

Oh and by the way I've already noted, from the beginning here, that I have no interest in weapons, yours or anyone else's including purchases or giveaways. In other words not only do I not want to take your guns, you literally couldn't PAY me to do it.

Yes I said they don't save lives -- they end them. That's the whole point of war technology. Of course if you can show me that time a speeding bullet jumped in front of the terrorizing car and diverted it to save those babies, I'll change my mind.

Once again, NO, you are not taking my weapons away. My weapons are life savers. Designed to SAVE my life.
Stick to your rocks and sticks and fists. Hope you don't give yourself a black eye.
whoo..

 

[Charles Guzinya]

And they shouldn't. AN AR-15 is an Armalite Rifle, and by definition it can be operated in a fully automatic mode:

The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun.

If the AR-15 can be operated in fully automatic mode, and and a fully automatic rifle is an assault rife, why shouldn't the AR-15 be considered an “assault rifle”? Why should it matter if it is or isn't?

And why shouldn't ordinary citizens be allowed to possess the weapons they need or want to defend themselves from home invasion or military assault?

You can own a fully automatic weapon. kindly apply for your class 3 license, and when granted, go purchase one.

Currently, these states allow private ownership of machineguns: AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, MA, ME, MD, MS, MT, ND, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, and WY.

thats an infringement on ownership and therefor a violation of the 2nd amendment,,,

voice your complaints to the ATF, not me. I DO NOT CARE IF YOU BELIVE IT IS A VIOLATION.

there in lies the problem,,, you dont care about peoples rights and side with the tyrants ,,,

Are you talking to me?

 

[justinacolmena]

You can own a fully automatic weapon. But it should not be as simple as todays Gun background check.
Therefore I still agree that the need for a fully automatic weapon should be for police or military only.

Why should our own police forces be empowered to slaughter us in our own homes while we are denied the firepower to defend ourselves from foreign invasion?

kindly apply for your class 3 license, and when granted, go purchase one.

Fifth Amendment - Right Against Self-Incrimination – Annenberg Classroom

This provision of the Fifth Amendment protects a person from being forced to reveal to the police, prosecutor, judge, or jury any information that might subject him or her to criminal prosecution.

www.annenbergclassroom.org

That requires answering a long list of self-incriminating questions on federal ATF government forms, in violation of the Fifth Amendment.

Currently, these states allow private ownership of machineguns: AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, MA, ME, MD, MS, MT, ND, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, and WY.

So there’s a long state prison sentence to serve after completing a federal prison sentence for the exact same alleged crime, which isn't really a crime at all in pursuance of the Second Amendment, notwithstanding the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment and the clause of the sixth amendment requiring the state and district of the jury trial to have been previously ascertained by law.

Double Jeopardy - FindLaw

The U.S. Constitution says that criminal defendants can't be prosecuted twice for the same offense. To learn more about Double Jeopardy and related topics, visit FindLaw's section on Criminal Rights.

criminal.findlaw.com

PrawfsBlawg: The So-Called Vicinage Clause

prawfsblawg.blogs.com

Sneaky thieving lawyers are finding a way around that one, too.