Here’s the reason people tell me they want to buy an AR-15. And it’s simply ludicrous

[2aguy]

“Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one.”

It is simple – and there’s nothing wrong with wanting to possess an AR 15; it’s dishonest and a lie to claim one ‘needs’ an AR 15.

And it isn’t necessary to lie about ‘needing’ and AR 15 to advance a dishonest, baseless argument against ‘banning’ AR 15s.

I need an AR-15 for threats where other choices are the wrong one…..for the job at hand.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

YES, it was you moron.
George Washington was part of the Virginia militia.

What the fuck kind of dodge was that? George Washington wasn't the government. The government does not have any Constitutionally protected rights. The bill of rights are for the protection of rights from the government.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I need an AR-15 for threats where other choices are the wrong one…..for the job at hand.

Need is not a requirement. You have a right to an AR 15 for threats..............

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It doesn't matter they signed the certificate.
Most of them were PART of the general assembly................TRAITORS.

Yes it matters

 

[bigrebnc1775]

“Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one.”

It is simple – and there’s nothing wrong with wanting to possess an AR 15; it’s dishonest and a lie to claim one ‘needs’ an AR 15.

And it isn’t necessary to lie about ‘needing’ and AR 15 to advance a dishonest, baseless argument against ‘banning’ AR 15s.

Irony is when you a liar calls someone else a liar.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Really?
They sure use them a lot.

No the government doesn't have any rights. The bill of rights are for the protection of rights from the government.

 

[Blues Man]

Rights and amendments comprising of the CONSTITUTION.

You're FOS, idiot.

Passed by Congress June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th amendment granted women the right to vote.

The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, signed into law by President Calvin Coolidge on June 2, 1924, granted U.S. citizenship to all Native American Indians.

You need to read the text of the Amendment idiot.

The 19th

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.[1]

The 19th did not grant any rights it stopped the denial of rights to women.

And Indian Citizenship act did not grant any rights since citizenship is not a right it is a legal designation

 

[Devils_Advocate]

‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.

I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.

Some members of the tinfoil hat brigade have come up with the reply, “We need these weapons because we want to be effective against the government if it becomes tyrannical. That’s part of our Second Amendment right.” Personally, I think that’s ludicrous, but it has become an increasingly popular justification for purchasing a semi-automatic rifle.

[…]

If banning them outright seems like too extreme a solution to be politically palatable, here’s another option: Reclassify semi-automatic rifles as Class 3 firearms.’

Opinion: Here's the reason people tell me they want to buy an AR-15. And it's simply ludicrous | CNN

No weapon has been more in the public eye than the AR-15, in large part because of the tragic role it has played in some of this country's deadliest shootings, former DC police officer Michael Fanone writes. Fanone, who owns one of the weapons, writes that the AR-15 has the dubious distinction...

www.cnn.com

I disagree with the article’s author about ‘banning’ AR 15s or subjecting them to the provisions of the NFA. ‘Bans’ don’t work, they’re unwarranted government excess and overreach and likely un-Constitutional.

But he’s correct about wanting to own an AR 15 to ‘defend against government tyranny’ as being ridiculous nonsense.

Possessing an AR 15 is a want, not a ‘need.’

And there’s nothing wrong with that; citizens are not required to ‘justify’ exercising a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

As is always the case after a mass shooting or similar event, we see inane, baseless reasons contrived to ‘justify’ owning an AR 15 in a pathetic and unnecessary attempt to fend-off a ‘ban’ of such weapons where there is no political will to do so.

The only justification to own one is wanting one and any other reason matter not unless you can prove the possible sale is a future mass shooting.

I have said it before the AR-15 could be listed in the same group as the Uzi which would mean you can own one if you meet the requirements to obtain one which then would limit who could buy one seeing the requirements are much higher.

Now you wanting a reason why someone would buy one is none of your business unless the State can prove the individual buying the firearm is a possible threat or has a criminal record but any other reason is none of your concern and asking a question like you or the writer is asking is infringing on someone personal life.

 

[Blues Man]

The only justification to own one is wanting one and any other reason matter not unless you can prove the possible sale is a future mass shooting.

I have said it before the AR-15 could be listed in the same group as the Uzi which would mean you can own one if you meet the requirements to obtain one which then would limit who could buy one seeing the requirements are much higher.

Now you wanting a reason why someone would buy one is none of your business unless the State can prove the individual buying the firearm is a possible threat or has a criminal record but any other reason is none of your concern and asking a question like you or the writer is asking is infringing on someone personal life.

The Uzi is a fully automatic weapon the AR 15 is a commonplace semiautomatic rifle and semiautomatic rifles have been legal for civilian use since their inception over 100 years ago

 

[Devils_Advocate]

The Uzi is a fully automatic weapon the AR 15 is a commonplace semiautomatic rifle and semiautomatic rifles have been legal for civilian use since their inception over 100 years ago

Still can be added to the list if Congress deems that it belongs there…

You have the right to own a firearm but the Government can tell you what you can and can not buy!

Uzi and Tommy Gun are clear cut examples!

 

[Blues Man]

Still can be added to the list of Congress deems that it belongs there…

You have the right to own a firearm but the Government can tell you what you can and can not buy!

Uzi and Tommy Gun are clear cut examples!

No it can't.

And fully automatic weapons are still legal you just have to pay an extra tax. And Uzis and Tommy guns are FULLY AUTOMATIC. It is a very clear distinction

If you require different rules for one particular semiauto then all semiauto ownership is at risk.

The AR 15 is no different that any other semiautomatic rifle. it is not more powerful than any other rifle that is chambered for the same round. It is not more accurate , it does not have a faster rate of fire.

 

[miketx]

‘Usually, the motivation for purchasing the AR-15 is simple: People want one because they want one. Most times, the person who buys an AR-15 comes into the store already knowing that they intend to purchase one.

I’ve pressed some customers about why they want an AR-15, but no one could ever come up with a legitimate justification for needing that particular weapon.

Some members of the tinfoil hat brigade have come up with the reply, “We need these weapons because we want to be effective against the government if it becomes tyrannical. That’s part of our Second Amendment right.” Personally, I think that’s ludicrous, but it has become an increasingly popular justification for purchasing a semi-automatic rifle.

[…]

If banning them outright seems like too extreme a solution to be politically palatable, here’s another option: Reclassify semi-automatic rifles as Class 3 firearms.’

Opinion: Here's the reason people tell me they want to buy an AR-15. And it's simply ludicrous | CNN

No weapon has been more in the public eye than the AR-15, in large part because of the tragic role it has played in some of this country's deadliest shootings, former DC police officer Michael Fanone writes. Fanone, who owns one of the weapons, writes that the AR-15 has the dubious distinction...

www.cnn.com

I disagree with the article’s author about ‘banning’ AR 15s or subjecting them to the provisions of the NFA. ‘Bans’ don’t work, they’re unwarranted government excess and overreach and likely un-Constitutional.

But he’s correct about wanting to own an AR 15 to ‘defend against government tyranny’ as being ridiculous nonsense.

Possessing an AR 15 is a want, not a ‘need.’

And there’s nothing wrong with that; citizens are not required to ‘justify’ exercising a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

As is always the case after a mass shooting or similar event, we see inane, baseless reasons contrived to ‘justify’ owning an AR 15 in a pathetic and unnecessary attempt to fend-off a ‘ban’ of such weapons where there is no political will to do so.

Total lying bullshit, like always.

 

[miketx]

Still can be added to the list if Congress deems that it belongs there…

You have the right to own a firearm but the Government can tell you what you can and can not buy!

Uzi and Tommy Gun are clear cut examples!

Gun banning commie.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

No it can't.

And fully automatic weapons are still legal you just have to pay an extra tax. And Uzis and Tommy guns are FULLY AUTOMATIC. It is a very clear distinction

If you require different rules for one particular semiauto then all semiauto ownership is at risk.

The AR 15 is no different that any other semiautomatic rifle. it is not more powerful than any other rifle that is chambered for the same round. It is not more accurate , it does not have a faster rate of fire.

They can be added to a list and you just admitted they can, so yes they can!

Fact is the Government can limit what you buy as a firearm which I have stated not once but a few damn times you f’ing moron!

You just wrote what I wrote in my original post about the Uzi and how you have added requirements, so this can also be done to the AR-15 and any firearm and truthfully it isn’t infringing on your right to own a firearm but what it does is limit your right of what type!

Got it?

Of course not because you will then scream second amendment and I will point to the Uzi and Tommy Gun again and how they were legal at one time and then added to a list that made it much harder to obtain…

Got it now?

Bet you don’t seeing you are a simple minded fool!

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

I need an AR-15 for threats where other choices are the wrong one…..for the job at hand.

Like hitting a barn door, at 15 paces?

 

[Devils_Advocate]

I need an AR-15 for threats where other choices are the wrong one…..for the job at hand.

Then you are a bad shot… Use a shotgun if you lack the ability to hit your target…

 

[Blues Man]

They can be added to a list and you just admitted they can, so yes they can!

Fact is the Government can limit what you buy as a firearm which I have stated not once but a few damn times you f’ing moron!

You just wrote what I wrote in my original post about the Uzi and how you have added requirements, so this can also be done to the AR-15 and any firearm and truthfully it isn’t infringing on your right to own a firearm but what it does is limit your right of what type!

Got it?

Of course not because you will then scream second amendment and I will point to the Uzi and Tommy Gun again and how they were legal at one time and then added to a list that made it much harder to obtain…

Got it now?

Bet you don’t seeing you are a simple minded fool!

I never admitted any such thing.

and you do not seem to understand that fully automatic weapons are not illegal.

And the regulations apply to ALL fully automatic weapons.

If you want a regulation for one particular semiautomatic rifle then it has to be applied to ALL semiautomatic rifles

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

What the fuck kind of dodge was that? George Washington wasn't the government.

YES, he was, you moron.
He was part of the Virginia militia, that's the government.
Holy crap, you know less than Trump about government, civics or US history.

The government does not have any Constitutionally protected rights. The bill of rights are for the protection of rights from the government.

The people ARE the government.
They don't have any rights?
You're FOS, but they likely just glazed over that, they do that with the "special" kids.

 

[Dagosa]

No the second amendment has never been about hunting

Yup. We accepted that everyone wanted to “eat”. But the constitution recognized this fact. Defense using unreliable black powder firearms, could only be accomplished with a Militia. It was a call to arms in a draft.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

You need to read the text of the Amendment idiot.

I did, you moron.

The 19th

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.[1]

The 19th did not grant any rights it stopped the denial of rights to women.

That's granting them rights, you idiot.
If women didn't have the right to vote, that means they weren't allowed to vote.
When did they have a right to vote before 1869?
They didn't.

And Indian Citizenship act did not grant any rights since citizenship is not a right it is a legal designation

WTF?
So, the US government can revoke an American Indian's citizenship?

Are ALL teabaggers self-proclaimed "genius' like Trump?