Question for gun enthusiast.

[BULLDOG]

If a right isn't based on a need your point is moot

Never said a right is based on need. I'll be scrolling past your posts for now because you haven't even tried to answer the direct question in the OP.

 

[rightwinger]

The mass killing would likely by a leftist to show how evil bump stocks are.

It’s how you lunatics role.

Can you guys EVER take responsibility for your actions?

 

[progressive hunter]

So far, only two have given a direct answer to my question.
1. Hunting feral hogs. -- this is not generally considered self-defense, so it is a valid answer to the question.
2. They are fun. -- this is not generally considered self-defense, so it is a valid even if weak answer to the question.

Remarks like "shall not be infringed" and "fuck you" might make you feel better. but it doesn't answer the question.

when you have 30 wild hogs eating you alive while sitting in your backyard with your children you might rethink that as not being self defense,,

self defense comes from a lot of different directions,,

"because fuck you" doesnt sound like it answers the question is because your question is stupid,,

who are you to arbitrate why someone needs something??

 

[BULLDOG]

when you have 30 wild hogs eating you alive while sitting in your backyard with your children you might rethink that as not being self defense,,

self defense comes from a lot of different directions,,

"because fuck you" doesnt sound like it answers the question is because your question is stupid,,

who are you to arbitrate why someone needs something??

I already said feral hogs was a valid answer to the question. Did you miss that? I'm not arbitrating anything. If you don't have an answer, then don't answer it.

 

[The Duke]

True, but a high rate of fire isn't totally unjustified for self-defense.

It's probably less ideal than semi-automatic if one is taking their shots.

 

[HeyNorm]

Can you guys EVER take responsibility for your actions?

Can you?

Like, “we’re here, we’re queer and we’re coming for your children”.

 

[progressive hunter]

I already said feral hogs was a valid answer to the question. Did you miss that? I'm not arbitrating anything. If you don't have an answer, then don't answer it.

I would ask your reason for such a stupid question, but I think we all know where you intend to go with this,,,

heres anther answer,,
we go with 30 rds because 50 is to heavy and the mags get to long and in the way,,

so 30 makes a good standard size magazine,,

 

[rightwinger]

Can you?

Like, “we’re here, we’re queer and we’re coming for your children”.

Which children have actually been taken?

I can point to 26 six year olds killed at Sandy Hook by an AR 15

 

[BULLDOG]

I would ask your reason for such a stupid question, but I think we all know where you intend to go with this,,,

heres anther answer,,
we go with 30 rds because 50 is to heavy and the mags get to long and in the way,,

so 30 makes a good standard size magazine,,

Coward. Answer the question instead of relying on stock answers that have nothing to do with my question.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Next mass killing using a Bump Stock….

Blood is on Supreme Courts Hands

Nope. It is on congress.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I would say that as of the Spanish American War, the federal military might has far exceeded anything a private citizen can ever yield. The change started just before the civil war in the form of the Colt 1851. If I go back from there, yes, canons were owned by the very rich to protect the village from Indians and Marauders. And in the Revolutionary war, those canons were "Loaned" to the Continental Army.

And the rifle that actually won the Revolutionary war was not purchased by civilians as it would be too expensive. The Rifled Barrel Rifles were purchased by the Continental Congress. Had it stayed musket to musket I doubt if American would have a constitution right now. The Brits also had access to the same technology passed on it.

Riddle me this, in the next county, you see an entire Air Force equipped with F-15s and 16, acres of M-1A2 Tanks, Bradleys and if they are on a coastline, they start showing up with a small navy, do you really want that around? If they have it, they are going to use it. And get a few million killed in the process. And they are still going to lose. I wonder where you would get the trillions to do this suicide.

You are woefully ignorant. The Continental Army never issued rifled muskets. What rifles existed were in the hands of their owners in the militias who operated as skirmishers. The Continental Army issued mostly French smooth bore Charleville muskets with some Brown Bess' and a few American built smooth bore muskets. Even the British Army only had one rifle unit at the time, The Experimental Rifle Corps which was armed with somewhere between 100 and 200 Ferguson Rifles. It was disbanded after major Ferguson was wounded at the Battle of Brandywine.

 

[AZrailwhale]

In 1934, I needed to own a Thompson 1921 or a BAR no longer cut it. But, of course, Bonnie and Clyde would agree as would John Dillinger.

And practically every police and sheriff's department in the USA. Almost all had either Thompsons, BARs or even Lewis Guns in their arsenals just like they have armored vehicles now.

 

[AZrailwhale]

The TRUMPCourt fucked over the safety of the American public to pander to RW extremists

I need a bump stock to kill more children

What SCOTUS did was to rule that the BATF can't make up its own laws. Congress has to pass laws, NOT unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats.

 

[progressive hunter]

Coward. Answer the question instead of relying on stock answers that have nothing to do with my question.

how about you stop with the word games and get to the punch line where you tell us theres no good reason people have this type of weapon??

 

[HeyNorm]

Which children have actually been taken?

I can point to 26 six year olds killed at Sandy Hook by an AR 15

And a tranny that took out a few as well.

And speaking of taken children. Why aren’t you tracking down those 85,000 missing migrant children creepy Joe let in? Does he even want to?

 

[fncceo]

is there any reason for high rate of fire for anything other than self-defense?

Just to see the look on your face.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

 

[rightwinger]

Nope. It is on congress.

Next mass killing using a Bump Stock

Supreme Court will just say
Why should we care?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Never said a right is based on need. I'll be scrolling past your posts for now because you haven't even tried to answer the direct question in the OP.

Who Posted this?
Obviously, if you are defending your home from attackers, you need that high rate of fire, and extended capacity, but are there any other circumstances where a high rate of fire and extended capacity are required?

 

[rightwinger]

And a tranny that took out a few as well.

And speaking of taken children. Why aren’t you tracking down those 85,000 missing migrant children creepy Joe let in? Does he even want to?

Linky, linky