Gun Control Compromise

[2aguy]

Has it occurred to you that there are bad in everything but that it doesn't mean all cops are bad?

Yes, that has occurred to me. But here's the problem.

Jason Van Dyke shot LaQuan McDonald 16 times, most of them while he was lying on the ground helpless.

Other cops filed false police reports to cover for him, went around to surrounding buildings to make sure any survellience tapes were erased, and the FOP spent millions defending him. And if a single tape of him shooting this kid hadn't managed to survive, he'd have probably gotten away with it.

Yesterday, a judge acquitted three cops who filed false reports on the shooting, coming up with all sorts of excuses for them. Today they are going to sentence van Dyke, almost five years after the shooting. Most people expect him to get a whopping 6 years.

The problem isn't the bad cops, the problem is the good cops and the system cover for them.

Joe is a typical liberal: party of excuses. He finds isolated incidents to try and make some whacky point instead of just being honest and saying he's for evil and crime. Those people are just like that I guess.

A kid playing with a toy isn't a crime. A lady talking back to a racist cop who pulled her over for a bullshit traffic violation isn't a crime. These are the kinds of incidents I am on about.

If you pull a gun on a cop and he shoots you, I really don't have any problem with that.

Hey.....moron.....the 3 cops you just accused of making false reports were just found not guilty by a judge......you doofus.

 

[JoeB131]

Hey.....moron.....the 3 cops you just accused of making false reports were just found not guilty by a judge......you doofus.

exactly my point.

This moron judge ignored the fact they filed openly false reports. the system covers for corrupt cops.

heck, I halfway expected van Dyke to get a walk. Good thing a jury heard it and not a judge.

 

[2aguy]

Hey.....moron.....the 3 cops you just accused of making false reports were just found not guilty by a judge......you doofus.

exactly my point.

This moron judge ignored the fact they filed openly false reports. the system covers for corrupt cops.

heck, I halfway expected van Dyke to get a walk. Good thing a jury heard it and not a judge.

Moron......she read the reports..... you are a moron....

 

[Kondor3]

We've already compromised our Rights with 22,000 restrictive gun laws already on the books. Also, sweeping Fed Laws like NFA 1934, and GCA 1968 are a travesty. States have passed extremely restrictive gun laws. ALL of them unconstitutional.

If they are unconstitutional, then why are they still on the books?

The NRA and other gun-advocacy groups routinely challenge gun-control laws in the law courts at the drop of a hat.

When they think they have a case they can win, anyway.

 

[Andylusion]

Hey.....moron.....the 3 cops you just accused of making false reports were just found not guilty by a judge......you doofus.

exactly my point.

This moron judge ignored the fact they filed openly false reports. the system covers for corrupt cops.

heck, I halfway expected van Dyke to get a walk. Good thing a jury heard it and not a judge.

Left-wing morality....

Hillary Clinton, endless evidence "Innocent until proven guilty!"
Three cops, found innocent by a judge "Guilty even if proven innocent!"

 

[Andylusion]

We've already compromised our Rights with 22,000 restrictive gun laws already on the books. Also, sweeping Fed Laws like NFA 1934, and GCA 1968 are a travesty. States have passed extremely restrictive gun laws. ALL of them unconstitutional.

If they are unconstitutional, then why are they still on the books?

The NRA and other gun-advocacy groups routinely challenge gun-control laws in the law courts at the drop of a hat.

When they think they have a case they can win, anyway.

There are a number of things the government is doing that is completely unconstitutional. The left-wing routinely supports unconstitutional policy.

 

[iceberg]

quite likely cause those shouting a lot are full of shit.

WE ARE NOT COMING AFTER YOUR GUNS!!!!

well it may honestly start out that way. but the more they *try* to define the "bad" guns the more they "misfire" and wind up getting frustrated and doing a blanket ban on SEMI-AUTOMATIC w/10+ rounds it can hold.

which is about all of 'em.

they've yet to show a comprehensive knowledge of the topic so no; until they educate themselves, i'd not compromise with them either.

I have neighbors that are big anti gun lefties. When I go shooting, I make an effort to load the car when they are outside. I was lucky enough to do that recently and it allowed me to educate the ignorant on a few things. Sad part is she is a college professor and he works in some professional position at a major construction company.

I own an AR-15 and a Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle. As I was loading both, she made a comment that people shouldn't own assault weapons. I showed her the Mini 14 asking her why I shouldn't own it and why she thought it was an assault rifle. She indicated her statement was about the AR-15 although she couldn't call it by name but referred to it as the "scary looking military one". I asked her was the Mini 14 OK to own and despite her claim that she didn't like guns, she was OK with it calling it a "hunting rifle". It gave me a chance to educated the supposed educated lefty. During the lesson it was explained to her that both fired a .223, functioned semi automatically, and had the same size magazine. They are the same gun other than the looks. I could tell she was surprised and wanted to say something negative about the Mini 14 but knew that would prove her dislike of the AR was based on how it looked rather than how it functioned. Haven't had any more comments in similar situations.

kudos for the educational patience approach. i prefer that whenever possible. this is a GREAT example of my point that unless you know about guns, you shouldn't be writing laws about them. i know one said they don't know how to fix cars, but i'm pretty sure they know how they work and that a bus isn't a compact car also. they at least know the basics of cars and how they work to writing laws on how they operate. i doubt anyone ever thought once you ran out of gas, you had to get a new gas tank which is about the closest analogy i can think of.

the media portrays them as military weapons and while they're styled after military weapons yes, i can't think of a single major country that uses AR15's in their military. they will use the military version. why?

they are different.

the mini 14 is an amazing rifle. i'd look into one if they made them left handed but i don't believe they do. maybe some searching when i get home and research. but in any event, i wish more people would do the education approach and i wish more people were receptive to it. i wish they'd change their minds with said knowledge. but when they find out they're "semi-automatic" they now want to ban semi-automatics, not go "wow i was wrong about automatic weapons".

the more you seem to explain the AR is like most other rifles in functionality and "end result" the more they want to simply ban all guns.

then they wonder why people want to talk "sensible" laws cause they push for "more" of them the more they tend to "not-learn".

 

[iceberg]

The Second Amendment protects the natural right to keep and bear arms, the same type of arms that crooks and thugs might use against you, and the same type of arms that government agents might use against you

We also know that the first thing tyrants do when they come to power is to disarm the population. Sometimes tyrants are jackbooted thugs. Sometimes tyrants are the majority in an elected government

To the framers of the Constitution, an armed population is the best defense against tyranny

No, it limits the Federals powers. Nothing in the constitution deals with Natural or God Given rights. I suggest you read the constitution again without your preformed ideas about what you think it says.

You are correct that the constitution does not mention natural rights very much.
But it does mention them enough for us to know the founders believed they existed.

{...
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
...}

So then clearly there is the stated assumption that the people, all individuals, to have inherent rights.
And combined with the Declaration of Independence, then clearly it is those inherent individual, natural rights, that are the only source of any authority at all.

And some natural rights are enumerated.

{...
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
...}

When you cut through all the BS, the Rights aren't given by the Constitution. What the Constitution is saying is that the Federals cannot take those rights. The actual rights are given by the states and local governments.

well then, i have the right for my guns and they can't take it away.

thank you for summing this up so nicely.

 

[Kondor3]

What is needed...

• National standards, overriding anything at the State level
• Mandatory licensing of owners
• Mandatory registration of individual firearms
• Mandatory licensing of all commercial dealers
• Mandatory reporting and tracking of all transfers and dispositions
• Mandatory periodic universal background checks
• Limit on the number of firearms that an individual can own
• Different categories of licensing for different categories of firearms
• General and license-specific requirements for each license category
• Mandatory periodic training for each category of firearms owned
• Centralized national database for licensing and registration, etc.
• GPS locators embedded into or installed onto each firearm
• Enforcement in the law-courts with real teeth (fines, prison) for chronic violators

 

[Conservative65]

Has it occurred to you that there are bad in everything but that it doesn't mean all cops are bad?

Yes, that has occurred to me. But here's the problem.

Jason Van Dyke shot LaQuan McDonald 16 times, most of them while he was lying on the ground helpless.

Other cops filed false police reports to cover for him, went around to surrounding buildings to make sure any survellience tapes were erased, and the FOP spent millions defending him. And if a single tape of him shooting this kid hadn't managed to survive, he'd have probably gotten away with it.

Yesterday, a judge acquitted three cops who filed false reports on the shooting, coming up with all sorts of excuses for them. Today they are going to sentence van Dyke, almost five years after the shooting. Most people expect him to get a whopping 6 years.

The problem isn't the bad cops, the problem is the good cops and the system cover for them.

Joe is a typical liberal: party of excuses. He finds isolated incidents to try and make some whacky point instead of just being honest and saying he's for evil and crime. Those people are just like that I guess.

A kid playing with a toy isn't a crime. A lady talking back to a racist cop who pulled her over for a bullshit traffic violation isn't a crime. These are the kinds of incidents I am on about.

If you pull a gun on a cop and he shoots you, I really don't have any problem with that.

The problem is you're a little **** that whines about everything.

A kid waving around a gun with the things that show it's a toy having been removed gets you shot. A lady that likely considers everything racist because she's an entitlement minded black doesn't make the stop bullshit.

 

[Conservative65]

Joe is also the first one to whine "you can't judge all of a group by what a small number do". That is, unless a small number of police do something wrong then he applies it to all of them.

Again, see above. When Police Departments and the Prosecutors COVER for these bad cops (who are in the minority) then, um, yeah, they are in the wrong.

That doesn't mean all cops are bad like you claim.

 

[Conservative65]

Has it occurred to you that there are bad in everything but that it doesn't mean all cops are bad?

Yes, that has occurred to me. But here's the problem.

Jason Van Dyke shot LaQuan McDonald 16 times, most of them while he was lying on the ground helpless.

Other cops filed false police reports to cover for him, went around to surrounding buildings to make sure any survellience tapes were erased, and the FOP spent millions defending him. And if a single tape of him shooting this kid hadn't managed to survive, he'd have probably gotten away with it.

Yesterday, a judge acquitted three cops who filed false reports on the shooting, coming up with all sorts of excuses for them. Today they are going to sentence van Dyke, almost five years after the shooting. Most people expect him to get a whopping 6 years.

The problem isn't the bad cops, the problem is the good cops and the system cover for them.

Joe is a typical liberal: party of excuses. He finds isolated incidents to try and make some whacky point instead of just being honest and saying he's for evil and crime. Those people are just like that I guess.

A kid playing with a toy isn't a crime. A lady talking back to a racist cop who pulled her over for a bullshit traffic violation isn't a crime. These are the kinds of incidents I am on about.

If you pull a gun on a cop and he shoots you, I really don't have any problem with that.

Hey.....moron.....the 3 cops you just accused of making false reports were just found not guilty by a judge......you doofus.

To Joe, unless a cop is automatically assumed to be guilty simply because of an accusation, it's wrong. When things go through the legal process, unless the outcome is what he likes, he considers those involved as covering up things.

 

[Conservative65]

quite likely cause those shouting a lot are full of shit.

WE ARE NOT COMING AFTER YOUR GUNS!!!!

well it may honestly start out that way. but the more they *try* to define the "bad" guns the more they "misfire" and wind up getting frustrated and doing a blanket ban on SEMI-AUTOMATIC w/10+ rounds it can hold.

which is about all of 'em.

they've yet to show a comprehensive knowledge of the topic so no; until they educate themselves, i'd not compromise with them either.

I have neighbors that are big anti gun lefties. When I go shooting, I make an effort to load the car when they are outside. I was lucky enough to do that recently and it allowed me to educate the ignorant on a few things. Sad part is she is a college professor and he works in some professional position at a major construction company.

I own an AR-15 and a Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle. As I was loading both, she made a comment that people shouldn't own assault weapons. I showed her the Mini 14 asking her why I shouldn't own it and why she thought it was an assault rifle. She indicated her statement was about the AR-15 although she couldn't call it by name but referred to it as the "scary looking military one". I asked her was the Mini 14 OK to own and despite her claim that she didn't like guns, she was OK with it calling it a "hunting rifle". It gave me a chance to educated the supposed educated lefty. During the lesson it was explained to her that both fired a .223, functioned semi automatically, and had the same size magazine. They are the same gun other than the looks. I could tell she was surprised and wanted to say something negative about the Mini 14 but knew that would prove her dislike of the AR was based on how it looked rather than how it functioned. Haven't had any more comments in similar situations.

kudos for the educational patience approach. i prefer that whenever possible. this is a GREAT example of my point that unless you know about guns, you shouldn't be writing laws about them. i know one said they don't know how to fix cars, but i'm pretty sure they know how they work and that a bus isn't a compact car also. they at least know the basics of cars and how they work to writing laws on how they operate. i doubt anyone ever thought once you ran out of gas, you had to get a new gas tank which is about the closest analogy i can think of.

the media portrays them as military weapons and while they're styled after military weapons yes, i can't think of a single major country that uses AR15's in their military. they will use the military version. why?

they are different.

the mini 14 is an amazing rifle. i'd look into one if they made them left handed but i don't believe they do. maybe some searching when i get home and research. but in any event, i wish more people would do the education approach and i wish more people were receptive to it. i wish they'd change their minds with said knowledge. but when they find out they're "semi-automatic" they now want to ban semi-automatics, not go "wow i was wrong about automatic weapons".

the more you seem to explain the AR is like most other rifles in functionality and "end result" the more they want to simply ban all guns.

then they wonder why people want to talk "sensible" laws cause they push for "more" of them the more they tend to "not-learn".

They are good neighbors and don't cause problems. We get along fine. They have different views on things. Had the situation been otherwise, I would not have been as nice and made them look like idiots. By the views they expressed, they proved themselves to be idiots.

 

[iceberg]

quite likely cause those shouting a lot are full of shit.

WE ARE NOT COMING AFTER YOUR GUNS!!!!

well it may honestly start out that way. but the more they *try* to define the "bad" guns the more they "misfire" and wind up getting frustrated and doing a blanket ban on SEMI-AUTOMATIC w/10+ rounds it can hold.

which is about all of 'em.

they've yet to show a comprehensive knowledge of the topic so no; until they educate themselves, i'd not compromise with them either.

I have neighbors that are big anti gun lefties. When I go shooting, I make an effort to load the car when they are outside. I was lucky enough to do that recently and it allowed me to educate the ignorant on a few things. Sad part is she is a college professor and he works in some professional position at a major construction company.

I own an AR-15 and a Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle. As I was loading both, she made a comment that people shouldn't own assault weapons. I showed her the Mini 14 asking her why I shouldn't own it and why she thought it was an assault rifle. She indicated her statement was about the AR-15 although she couldn't call it by name but referred to it as the "scary looking military one". I asked her was the Mini 14 OK to own and despite her claim that she didn't like guns, she was OK with it calling it a "hunting rifle". It gave me a chance to educated the supposed educated lefty. During the lesson it was explained to her that both fired a .223, functioned semi automatically, and had the same size magazine. They are the same gun other than the looks. I could tell she was surprised and wanted to say something negative about the Mini 14 but knew that would prove her dislike of the AR was based on how it looked rather than how it functioned. Haven't had any more comments in similar situations.

kudos for the educational patience approach. i prefer that whenever possible. this is a GREAT example of my point that unless you know about guns, you shouldn't be writing laws about them. i know one said they don't know how to fix cars, but i'm pretty sure they know how they work and that a bus isn't a compact car also. they at least know the basics of cars and how they work to writing laws on how they operate. i doubt anyone ever thought once you ran out of gas, you had to get a new gas tank which is about the closest analogy i can think of.

the media portrays them as military weapons and while they're styled after military weapons yes, i can't think of a single major country that uses AR15's in their military. they will use the military version. why?

they are different.

the mini 14 is an amazing rifle. i'd look into one if they made them left handed but i don't believe they do. maybe some searching when i get home and research. but in any event, i wish more people would do the education approach and i wish more people were receptive to it. i wish they'd change their minds with said knowledge. but when they find out they're "semi-automatic" they now want to ban semi-automatics, not go "wow i was wrong about automatic weapons".

the more you seem to explain the AR is like most other rifles in functionality and "end result" the more they want to simply ban all guns.

then they wonder why people want to talk "sensible" laws cause they push for "more" of them the more they tend to "not-learn".

They are good neighbors and don't cause problems. We get along fine. They have different views on things. Had the situation been otherwise, I would not have been as nice and made them look like idiots. By the views they expressed, they proved themselves to be idiots.

well they sounded at least receptive. opinions dug into any of us seldom change quickly. sounds like you made step 1 of maybe 10 steps needed to get people to understand. not asking for anyone to suddenly love guns, but at least understand what you like and don't like about them in a correct manner.

i just got some new neighbors and i already miss my last one. he just "moved away" without a word and didn't reply to text messages. now i have another family with kids. never had kids living next to me in 20 years. another phase of life has begun. now my security camera on my driveway catches the garbage man, lawn crew, a random bobcat or neighbors cat, and now - kids playing.

 

[Conservative65]

quite likely cause those shouting a lot are full of shit.

WE ARE NOT COMING AFTER YOUR GUNS!!!!

well it may honestly start out that way. but the more they *try* to define the "bad" guns the more they "misfire" and wind up getting frustrated and doing a blanket ban on SEMI-AUTOMATIC w/10+ rounds it can hold.

which is about all of 'em.

they've yet to show a comprehensive knowledge of the topic so no; until they educate themselves, i'd not compromise with them either.

I have neighbors that are big anti gun lefties. When I go shooting, I make an effort to load the car when they are outside. I was lucky enough to do that recently and it allowed me to educate the ignorant on a few things. Sad part is she is a college professor and he works in some professional position at a major construction company.

I own an AR-15 and a Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle. As I was loading both, she made a comment that people shouldn't own assault weapons. I showed her the Mini 14 asking her why I shouldn't own it and why she thought it was an assault rifle. She indicated her statement was about the AR-15 although she couldn't call it by name but referred to it as the "scary looking military one". I asked her was the Mini 14 OK to own and despite her claim that she didn't like guns, she was OK with it calling it a "hunting rifle". It gave me a chance to educated the supposed educated lefty. During the lesson it was explained to her that both fired a .223, functioned semi automatically, and had the same size magazine. They are the same gun other than the looks. I could tell she was surprised and wanted to say something negative about the Mini 14 but knew that would prove her dislike of the AR was based on how it looked rather than how it functioned. Haven't had any more comments in similar situations.

kudos for the educational patience approach. i prefer that whenever possible. this is a GREAT example of my point that unless you know about guns, you shouldn't be writing laws about them. i know one said they don't know how to fix cars, but i'm pretty sure they know how they work and that a bus isn't a compact car also. they at least know the basics of cars and how they work to writing laws on how they operate. i doubt anyone ever thought once you ran out of gas, you had to get a new gas tank which is about the closest analogy i can think of.

the media portrays them as military weapons and while they're styled after military weapons yes, i can't think of a single major country that uses AR15's in their military. they will use the military version. why?

they are different.

the mini 14 is an amazing rifle. i'd look into one if they made them left handed but i don't believe they do. maybe some searching when i get home and research. but in any event, i wish more people would do the education approach and i wish more people were receptive to it. i wish they'd change their minds with said knowledge. but when they find out they're "semi-automatic" they now want to ban semi-automatics, not go "wow i was wrong about automatic weapons".

the more you seem to explain the AR is like most other rifles in functionality and "end result" the more they want to simply ban all guns.

then they wonder why people want to talk "sensible" laws cause they push for "more" of them the more they tend to "not-learn".

They are good neighbors and don't cause problems. We get along fine. They have different views on things. Had the situation been otherwise, I would not have been as nice and made them look like idiots. By the views they expressed, they proved themselves to be idiots.

well they sounded at least receptive. opinions dug into any of us seldom change quickly. sounds like you made step 1 of maybe 10 steps needed to get people to understand. not asking for anyone to suddenly love guns, but at least understand what you like and don't like about them in a correct manner.

i just got some new neighbors and i already miss my last one. he just "moved away" without a word and didn't reply to text messages. now i have another family with kids. never had kids living next to me in 20 years. another phase of life has begun. now my security camera on my driveway catches the garbage man, lawn crew, a random bobcat or neighbors cat, and now - kids playing.

They heard what I said. Unless it changes their faulty opinion, they weren't receptive. That she wanted to change her statement about the Mini 14 being bad having been provided the knowledge that it was the same as the AR yet knowing it would discredit any argument she had at least says she has some level of intelligence.

 

[2aguy]

We've already compromised our Rights with 22,000 restrictive gun laws already on the books. Also, sweeping Fed Laws like NFA 1934, and GCA 1968 are a travesty. States have passed extremely restrictive gun laws. ALL of them unconstitutional.

If they are unconstitutional, then why are they still on the books?

The NRA and other gun-advocacy groups routinely challenge gun-control laws in the law courts at the drop of a hat.

When they think they have a case they can win, anyway.

The left wing lower courts are ignoring the Supreme Court rulings.....knowing in the past that there were only 4 reliable Constitutional votes on the court before Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were appointed......that's why....

 

[2aguy]

What is needed...

• National standards, overriding anything at the State level
• Mandatory licensing of owners
• Mandatory registration of individual firearms
• Mandatory licensing of all commercial dealers
• Mandatory reporting and tracking of all transfers and dispositions
• Mandatory periodic universal background checks
• Limit on the number of firearms that an individual can own
• Different categories of licensing for different categories of firearms
• General and license-specific requirements for each license category
• Mandatory periodic training for each category of firearms owned
• Centralized national database for licensing and registration, etc.
• GPS locators embedded into or installed onto each firearm
• Enforcement in the law-courts with real teeth (fines, prison) for chronic violators

Yes...you are a fascist...we get it.

Yes....according to you we need Poll Taxes for voting, Literacy tests for voting, we need a religious test on voting, and a loyalty oath for voting......

And how would anything you just listed do anything to stop criminals or mass shooters.....?

 

[2aguy]

quite likely cause those shouting a lot are full of shit.

WE ARE NOT COMING AFTER YOUR GUNS!!!!

well it may honestly start out that way. but the more they *try* to define the "bad" guns the more they "misfire" and wind up getting frustrated and doing a blanket ban on SEMI-AUTOMATIC w/10+ rounds it can hold.

which is about all of 'em.

they've yet to show a comprehensive knowledge of the topic so no; until they educate themselves, i'd not compromise with them either.

I have neighbors that are big anti gun lefties. When I go shooting, I make an effort to load the car when they are outside. I was lucky enough to do that recently and it allowed me to educate the ignorant on a few things. Sad part is she is a college professor and he works in some professional position at a major construction company.

I own an AR-15 and a Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle. As I was loading both, she made a comment that people shouldn't own assault weapons. I showed her the Mini 14 asking her why I shouldn't own it and why she thought it was an assault rifle. She indicated her statement was about the AR-15 although she couldn't call it by name but referred to it as the "scary looking military one". I asked her was the Mini 14 OK to own and despite her claim that she didn't like guns, she was OK with it calling it a "hunting rifle". It gave me a chance to educated the supposed educated lefty. During the lesson it was explained to her that both fired a .223, functioned semi automatically, and had the same size magazine. They are the same gun other than the looks. I could tell she was surprised and wanted to say something negative about the Mini 14 but knew that would prove her dislike of the AR was based on how it looked rather than how it functioned. Haven't had any more comments in similar situations.

kudos for the educational patience approach. i prefer that whenever possible. this is a GREAT example of my point that unless you know about guns, you shouldn't be writing laws about them. i know one said they don't know how to fix cars, but i'm pretty sure they know how they work and that a bus isn't a compact car also. they at least know the basics of cars and how they work to writing laws on how they operate. i doubt anyone ever thought once you ran out of gas, you had to get a new gas tank which is about the closest analogy i can think of.

the media portrays them as military weapons and while they're styled after military weapons yes, i can't think of a single major country that uses AR15's in their military. they will use the military version. why?

they are different.

the mini 14 is an amazing rifle. i'd look into one if they made them left handed but i don't believe they do. maybe some searching when i get home and research. but in any event, i wish more people would do the education approach and i wish more people were receptive to it. i wish they'd change their minds with said knowledge. but when they find out they're "semi-automatic" they now want to ban semi-automatics, not go "wow i was wrong about automatic weapons".

the more you seem to explain the AR is like most other rifles in functionality and "end result" the more they want to simply ban all guns.

then they wonder why people want to talk "sensible" laws cause they push for "more" of them the more they tend to "not-learn".

This is also why the want to get the AR-15 banned on the premise that it is a dangerous weapon that shouldn't be allowed for civilians. The anti-gun leadership understands that it is no different from any other semi-automatic rifle, pistol or shotgun in operation...so once they establish that the AR-15 can be banned because it is dangerous, the next step will be to demand all the other semi-auto rifles, pistols and shotguns also be banned, since they operate the same way....

This is why there can be no "compromise" with anti-gunners....each compromise is simply setting up the next "compromise" until all guns are banned and confiscated....they are just becoming more and more open about their end goal now that they think they have power to achieve it...

 

[iceberg]

quite likely cause those shouting a lot are full of shit.

WE ARE NOT COMING AFTER YOUR GUNS!!!!

well it may honestly start out that way. but the more they *try* to define the "bad" guns the more they "misfire" and wind up getting frustrated and doing a blanket ban on SEMI-AUTOMATIC w/10+ rounds it can hold.

which is about all of 'em.

they've yet to show a comprehensive knowledge of the topic so no; until they educate themselves, i'd not compromise with them either.

I have neighbors that are big anti gun lefties. When I go shooting, I make an effort to load the car when they are outside. I was lucky enough to do that recently and it allowed me to educate the ignorant on a few things. Sad part is she is a college professor and he works in some professional position at a major construction company.

I own an AR-15 and a Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle. As I was loading both, she made a comment that people shouldn't own assault weapons. I showed her the Mini 14 asking her why I shouldn't own it and why she thought it was an assault rifle. She indicated her statement was about the AR-15 although she couldn't call it by name but referred to it as the "scary looking military one". I asked her was the Mini 14 OK to own and despite her claim that she didn't like guns, she was OK with it calling it a "hunting rifle". It gave me a chance to educated the supposed educated lefty. During the lesson it was explained to her that both fired a .223, functioned semi automatically, and had the same size magazine. They are the same gun other than the looks. I could tell she was surprised and wanted to say something negative about the Mini 14 but knew that would prove her dislike of the AR was based on how it looked rather than how it functioned. Haven't had any more comments in similar situations.

kudos for the educational patience approach. i prefer that whenever possible. this is a GREAT example of my point that unless you know about guns, you shouldn't be writing laws about them. i know one said they don't know how to fix cars, but i'm pretty sure they know how they work and that a bus isn't a compact car also. they at least know the basics of cars and how they work to writing laws on how they operate. i doubt anyone ever thought once you ran out of gas, you had to get a new gas tank which is about the closest analogy i can think of.

the media portrays them as military weapons and while they're styled after military weapons yes, i can't think of a single major country that uses AR15's in their military. they will use the military version. why?

they are different.

the mini 14 is an amazing rifle. i'd look into one if they made them left handed but i don't believe they do. maybe some searching when i get home and research. but in any event, i wish more people would do the education approach and i wish more people were receptive to it. i wish they'd change their minds with said knowledge. but when they find out they're "semi-automatic" they now want to ban semi-automatics, not go "wow i was wrong about automatic weapons".

the more you seem to explain the AR is like most other rifles in functionality and "end result" the more they want to simply ban all guns.

then they wonder why people want to talk "sensible" laws cause they push for "more" of them the more they tend to "not-learn".

They are good neighbors and don't cause problems. We get along fine. They have different views on things. Had the situation been otherwise, I would not have been as nice and made them look like idiots. By the views they expressed, they proved themselves to be idiots.

well they sounded at least receptive. opinions dug into any of us seldom change quickly. sounds like you made step 1 of maybe 10 steps needed to get people to understand. not asking for anyone to suddenly love guns, but at least understand what you like and don't like about them in a correct manner.

i just got some new neighbors and i already miss my last one. he just "moved away" without a word and didn't reply to text messages. now i have another family with kids. never had kids living next to me in 20 years. another phase of life has begun. now my security camera on my driveway catches the garbage man, lawn crew, a random bobcat or neighbors cat, and now - kids playing.

They heard what I said. Unless it changes their faulty opinion, they weren't receptive. That she wanted to change her statement about the Mini 14 being bad having been provided the knowledge that it was the same as the AR yet knowing it would discredit any argument she had at least says she has some level of intelligence.

and that's where i have fault.

when i learn i am wrong, i change. others when they learn they are wrong, demonize it anyway and find reason to justify it. huge difference in how people deal with things around them.

 

[Conservative65]

quite likely cause those shouting a lot are full of shit.

WE ARE NOT COMING AFTER YOUR GUNS!!!!

well it may honestly start out that way. but the more they *try* to define the "bad" guns the more they "misfire" and wind up getting frustrated and doing a blanket ban on SEMI-AUTOMATIC w/10+ rounds it can hold.

which is about all of 'em.

they've yet to show a comprehensive knowledge of the topic so no; until they educate themselves, i'd not compromise with them either.

I have neighbors that are big anti gun lefties. When I go shooting, I make an effort to load the car when they are outside. I was lucky enough to do that recently and it allowed me to educate the ignorant on a few things. Sad part is she is a college professor and he works in some professional position at a major construction company.

I own an AR-15 and a Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle. As I was loading both, she made a comment that people shouldn't own assault weapons. I showed her the Mini 14 asking her why I shouldn't own it and why she thought it was an assault rifle. She indicated her statement was about the AR-15 although she couldn't call it by name but referred to it as the "scary looking military one". I asked her was the Mini 14 OK to own and despite her claim that she didn't like guns, she was OK with it calling it a "hunting rifle". It gave me a chance to educated the supposed educated lefty. During the lesson it was explained to her that both fired a .223, functioned semi automatically, and had the same size magazine. They are the same gun other than the looks. I could tell she was surprised and wanted to say something negative about the Mini 14 but knew that would prove her dislike of the AR was based on how it looked rather than how it functioned. Haven't had any more comments in similar situations.

kudos for the educational patience approach. i prefer that whenever possible. this is a GREAT example of my point that unless you know about guns, you shouldn't be writing laws about them. i know one said they don't know how to fix cars, but i'm pretty sure they know how they work and that a bus isn't a compact car also. they at least know the basics of cars and how they work to writing laws on how they operate. i doubt anyone ever thought once you ran out of gas, you had to get a new gas tank which is about the closest analogy i can think of.

the media portrays them as military weapons and while they're styled after military weapons yes, i can't think of a single major country that uses AR15's in their military. they will use the military version. why?

they are different.

the mini 14 is an amazing rifle. i'd look into one if they made them left handed but i don't believe they do. maybe some searching when i get home and research. but in any event, i wish more people would do the education approach and i wish more people were receptive to it. i wish they'd change their minds with said knowledge. but when they find out they're "semi-automatic" they now want to ban semi-automatics, not go "wow i was wrong about automatic weapons".

the more you seem to explain the AR is like most other rifles in functionality and "end result" the more they want to simply ban all guns.

then they wonder why people want to talk "sensible" laws cause they push for "more" of them the more they tend to "not-learn".

This is also why the want to get the AR-15 banned on the premise that it is a dangerous weapon that shouldn't be allowed for civilians. The anti-gun leadership understands that it is no different from any other semi-automatic rifle, pistol or shotgun in operation...so once they establish that the AR-15 can be banned because it is dangerous, the next step will be to demand all the other semi-auto rifles, pistols and shotguns also be banned, since they operate the same way....

This is why there can be no "compromise" with anti-gunners....each compromise is simply setting up the next "compromise" until all guns are banned and confiscated....they are just becoming more and more open about their end goal now that they think they have power to achieve it...

Don't think their purpose is anything but a total ban. None of them have the guts to say that in the open because they know the results would be disastrous.