Stephen Crowder, Top 5 AR-15 myths...banning them is a Trojan Horse...

[WinterBorn]

I've done a bit of research on the AR15 today. Some of the things I thought were wrong. However, the fact that the AR 15 is a slightly modified clone of the military M16 assault rifle has not changed. We don't need military assault rifles on the street. even those that are slightly modified

Who the hell walks around out on the streets with an AR-15? How are a bunch of gun enthusiasts with AR-15s sitting in a case at home more dangerous than the millions of concealed handguns people walk around with everyday?

Actually, some of the blame for the fear of ARs can be blamed on the open carry antagonists/mall ninjas who paraded around the streets, malls or wherever with a an AR (dressed with every imaginable aftermarket add-on) just to show they can.

Yes, I know the one on the right is not an AR. But the point stands.

Our second amendment well regulated militias

LOL! Come around to that lie again? Perhaps you can show me where in the Second Amendment it says, "...the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? You can, right?

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

And the rest of it?

 

[there4eyeM]

The firearms extremists have made the present 'bed', and now they lie in it.

 

[WinterBorn]

I've done a bit of research on the AR15 today. Some of the things I thought were wrong. However, the fact that the AR 15 is a slightly modified clone of the military M16 assault rifle has not changed. We don't need military assault rifles on the street. even those that are slightly modified

Who the hell walks around out on the streets with an AR-15? How are a bunch of gun enthusiasts with AR-15s sitting in a case at home more dangerous than the millions of concealed handguns people walk around with everyday?

Actually, some of the blame for the fear of ARs can be blamed on the open carry antagonists/mall ninjas who paraded around the streets, malls or wherever with a an AR (dressed with every imaginable aftermarket add-on) just to show they can.

Yes, I know the one on the right is not an AR. But the point stands.

A gun nut by any other name would be just as stupid. (sorry Will)

And what is your definition of a "gun nut"?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

A gun nut by any other name would be just as stupid. (sorry Will)

And what is your definition of a "gun nut"?

Anyone who disagrees with him

 

[rightwinger]

Who the hell walks around out on the streets with an AR-15? How are a bunch of gun enthusiasts with AR-15s sitting in a case at home more dangerous than the millions of concealed handguns people walk around with everyday?

Actually, some of the blame for the fear of ARs can be blamed on the open carry antagonists/mall ninjas who paraded around the streets, malls or wherever with a an AR (dressed with every imaginable aftermarket add-on) just to show they can.

Yes, I know the one on the right is not an AR. But the point stands.

Our second amendment well regulated militias

LOL! Come around to that lie again? Perhaps you can show me where in the Second Amendment it says, "...the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? You can, right?

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

Excellent. You found the dependent clause that provided one justification for the right to exist; but that doesn't change the fact that the right belongs to the PEOPLE, not just a militia.

If they wanted the right nondependent, they just would have said

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed......PERIOD

 

[rightwinger]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

One guys opinion

In practice....Militias had a set structure, organizational ranks, lists of members, set training

You know.....Well regulated

 

[BULLDOG]

Are all semi-auto rifles capable of unlimited rate of fire, and only limited by how fast the trigger is pulled? Are all semi-auto rifles capable of accurate fire for extended periods of time?

ALL semiautomatics fire one round for each trigger pull. As you can see that is not an unlimited rate of fire.

Even fully automatic firearms run up against a limit and the mechanics of the automatic firing mechanism and its cycle time is what limits a fully auto firearm.

A semiautomatic is limited to how fast a person can pull the trigger.

You might be able to pull the trigger faster than me you might not. But over time people tend to fatigue therefore the max rate of trigger pull is not maintained

And in general if you are pulling the trigger as fast as you can you will have little or no accuracy

Yes, and sand can only be loaded one scoop at the time. These pictures are loading sand at the exact same rate, right?
View attachment 178841

What's loading got to do with the fact that ALL semiautomatics only fire one round per trigger pull?

To use your sandbox analogy/

Say you pour sand into a funnel that only lets one grain of sand through every time you push a button

Would that sand move though the funnel at a faster rate if the funnel was being filled with a table spoon or a gallon jug?

Come on gun nut. You know one trigger pull one fire isn't the only relevant issue. Some guns are capable of shorter time between trigger pulls than others. A real gun nut would know that.

I'd have to see a link to show that. If it is true, the time difference is miniscule, and of no practical use.

In fact, since a tiny part of the force propelling the bullet down the barrel is bled off to work the action, it has until the bullet leaves the barrel to move the bolt completely to the rear (a spring pushing it back forward). Once the bullet has left the barrel, the force of the propellant will flow to the path of least resistance (the empty tube that is the barrel).

Yes, it is a small difference, but contrary to most gun nuts claims, it is a difference. That small difference on top of so many other small differences is why the military chose that particular gun design as their favorite killing tool. Minor modification to disable multi-fire doesn't negate all the other things that makes that gun such an effective killing machine. Other than for killing people, a honest hunter, or gun user of any other kind will tell you that 30 round capability is absurd.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

One guys opinion

In practice....Militias had a set structure, organizational ranks, lists of members, set training

You know.....Well regulated

Yeah, one guy who only helped author the Constitution. Obviously, you're more of a Constitutional scholar than he ever was.

 

[hunarcy]

Actually, some of the blame for the fear of ARs can be blamed on the open carry antagonists/mall ninjas who paraded around the streets, malls or wherever with a an AR (dressed with every imaginable aftermarket add-on) just to show they can.

Yes, I know the one on the right is not an AR. But the point stands.

Our second amendment well regulated militias

LOL! Come around to that lie again? Perhaps you can show me where in the Second Amendment it says, "...the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? You can, right?

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

Excellent. You found the dependent clause that provided one justification for the right to exist; but that doesn't change the fact that the right belongs to the PEOPLE, not just a militia.

If they wanted the right nondependent, they just would have said

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed......PERIOD

That IS the independent clause and exactly what it means.

 

[BULLDOG]

I've done a bit of research on the AR15 today. Some of the things I thought were wrong. However, the fact that the AR 15 is a slightly modified clone of the military M16 assault rifle has not changed. We don't need military assault rifles on the street. even those that are slightly modified

Who the hell walks around out on the streets with an AR-15? How are a bunch of gun enthusiasts with AR-15s sitting in a case at home more dangerous than the millions of concealed handguns people walk around with everyday?

Actually, some of the blame for the fear of ARs can be blamed on the open carry antagonists/mall ninjas who paraded around the streets, malls or wherever with a an AR (dressed with every imaginable aftermarket add-on) just to show they can.

Yes, I know the one on the right is not an AR. But the point stands.

A gun nut by any other name would be just as stupid. (sorry Will)

And what is your definition of a "gun nut"?

A good description would be anyone who agrees with the NRA on all their absurd claims. Someone who is expecting Obama to crawl out from under the bed to take his guns TONIGHT. An exact definition is more than I think I am capable of on such short notice.

 

[hunarcy]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

One guys opinion

In practice....Militias had a set structure, organizational ranks, lists of members, set training

You know.....Well regulated

Well regulated meant in good working order. That's not in dispute, either.

 

[rightwinger]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

One guys opinion

In practice....Militias had a set structure, organizational ranks, lists of members, set training

You know.....Well regulated

Yeah, one guy who only helped author the Constitution. Obviously, you're more of a Constitutional scholar than he ever was.

Mr Mason says nothing to exclude the well regulation of those people......only clarifies who those people would be

A well regulated militia in 1782 had a specific structure, training and organization......it was not a random assembly of people who happened to own arms

 

[rightwinger]

Our second amendment well regulated militias

LOL! Come around to that lie again? Perhaps you can show me where in the Second Amendment it says, "...the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? You can, right?

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

Excellent. You found the dependent clause that provided one justification for the right to exist; but that doesn't change the fact that the right belongs to the PEOPLE, not just a militia.

If they wanted the right nondependent, they just would have said

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed......PERIOD

That IS the independent clause and exactly what it means.

The need for guns to support a well regulated militia is well established

 

[hunarcy]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

One guys opinion

In practice....Militias had a set structure, organizational ranks, lists of members, set training

You know.....Well regulated

Yeah, one guy who only helped author the Constitution. Obviously, you're more of a Constitutional scholar than he ever was.

Mr Mason says nothing to exclude the well regulation of those people......only clarifies who those people would be

A well regulated militia in 1782 had a specific structure, training and organization......it was not a random assembly of people who happened to own arms

If you'd read Justice Scalia's opinion in the case, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., PETITIONERS v. DICK ANTHONY HELLER: on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit. 2008, you'd know that " . . . the 'militia' in colonial America consisted of a subset of 'the people'—those who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range.". It says nothing about specific structure, training and organization. Further, in times of emergency, the militia was often a a random assembly of people who happened to own arms

 

[hunarcy]

LOL! Come around to that lie again? Perhaps you can show me where in the Second Amendment it says, "...the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? You can, right?

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

Excellent. You found the dependent clause that provided one justification for the right to exist; but that doesn't change the fact that the right belongs to the PEOPLE, not just a militia.

If they wanted the right nondependent, they just would have said

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed......PERIOD

That IS the independent clause and exactly what it means.

The need for guns to support a well regulated militia is well established

And the ownership of firearms was NOT limited to a "well regulated militia."

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

One guys opinion

In practice....Militias had a set structure, organizational ranks, lists of members, set training

You know.....Well regulated

Yeah, one guy who only helped author the Constitution. Obviously, you're more of a Constitutional scholar than he ever was.

Mr Mason says nothing to exclude the well regulation of those people......only clarifies who those people would be

A well regulated militia in 1782 had a specific structure, training and organization......it was not a random assembly of people who happened to own arms

Correct, it was the whole of the people just as he said, not a random assembly.

 

[Skull Pilot]

How can you make an argument when you don't even know the definitions of the relevant terms?

The very definition of a semiautomatic firearm is that it fires one and only one round per trigger pull

Therefore the number of rounds per second or minute that any semiautomatic firearm in existence can fire is completely dependent on the speed the person can pull and release the trigger.

Are all semi-auto rifles capable of unlimited rate of fire, and only limited by how fast the trigger is pulled? Are all semi-auto rifles capable of accurate fire for extended periods of time?

ALL semiautomatics fire one round for each trigger pull. As you can see that is not an unlimited rate of fire.

Even fully automatic firearms run up against a limit and the mechanics of the automatic firing mechanism and its cycle time is what limits a fully auto firearm.

A semiautomatic is limited to how fast a person can pull the trigger.

You might be able to pull the trigger faster than me you might not. But over time people tend to fatigue therefore the max rate of trigger pull is not maintained

And in general if you are pulling the trigger as fast as you can you will have little or no accuracy

Yes, and sand can only be loaded one scoop at the time. These pictures are loading sand at the exact same rate, right?
View attachment 178841

What's loading got to do with the fact that ALL semiautomatics only fire one round per trigger pull?

To use your sandbox analogy/

Say you pour sand into a funnel that only lets one grain of sand through every time you push a button

Would that sand move though the funnel at a faster rate if the funnel was being filled with a table spoon or a gallon jug?

Come on gun nut. You know one trigger pull one fire isn't the only relevant issue. Some guns are capable of shorter time between trigger pulls than others. A real gun nut would know that.

Really?

You say these things as if you know but you are probably the most ignorant person here when it comes to firearms.

How many different semiautomatic rifles have you shot?

I have shot dozens of different semiautomatic rifles of varying caliber and ALL of them are limited to one round per trigger pull and the few milliseconds that might exist in the cycle times of the firing mechanism are irrelevant because a person can only pull the trigger so fast.

There may be some exceptional people who can pull a trigger 4 times per second but the upper end of the speed of a manual trigger pull is 3 times per second and most people would be hard pressed to keep that up for any length of time.

And you are stuck on this rate of fire issue even though 2 minutes of research will tell you that the rate of fire of every single semiautomatic firearm in existence today is one round per trigger pull.

And as I have tried to tell you the differences between semiautomatic rifles of the same caliber are irrelevant because they all fire the exact same round at the exact same rate with comparable accuracy but you seem to think that the AR can magically fire faster but you cannot prove it can you?

 

[WinterBorn]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

One guys opinion

In practice....Militias had a set structure, organizational ranks, lists of members, set training

You know.....Well regulated

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

 

[Skull Pilot]

But you seem to think background checks will stop shootings.

I know that no law prevents anyone from committing a crime but you don't seem to.

So all laws are a waste? That's nuts.

Where did I say that?

Laws are nothing but a codification of prohibited activities and a statement of the punishments for engaging in those activities and as such are necessary but those laws do not stop anyone from committing a crime

Got it. Laws are not a detriment to any crime. You know that's nuts, don't you?

So what criminals have been stopped by a law?

You do understand they people are criminals because the law did not stop them from committing a crime don't you?

So we're back to "LAWS BAD" I guess that is an acceptable belief for a gun nut.

If you could read you'd see I said laws as such are necessary but don't be disillusioned that a law will stop a person from committing a crime if they choose to do so

 

[Skull Pilot]

It is not a more effective killing tool than any other .223 semiauto

The military thinks it is.

SO I could have a semiautomatic rifle that fires a larger more powerful round like the 6.8 as this rifle does

and that just fine because it doesn't look like an M16

Perhaps you care to give a few specs on that gun? I'm far from an expert, but I know there are lots more reasons than caliber for why a rifle might be effective for a particular purpose.

The reason the .223 has become the dominant caliber is because the ammo is lighter and in fact less lethal than previous military rifles. The idea being that by wounding rather than killing enemy soldiers you force them to use more resources.

The ability to carry more ammo is accurate. I'm not sure about the "it wounds the soldier so it takes more men out of combat" reason.

One of the biggest was that we were looking to have a common round with our allies.

Then why not the 7.62 NATO?