The Left is Correct about 'Assault Rifles'

[Doug1943]

The basic argument of the Left, that 'assault rifles' are not necessary for personal defense, is correct. (Let's define 'assault rifle' as a semi-automatic rifle which can take magazines of 20 rounds or more, and whose rounds carry more than XXX foot-pounds of kinetic energy. [A gun enthusiast can fill in 'XXX' -- in otherwords, excluding a .22].)

I've seen posts positing a woman using one to fend off a rapist in a park, but, come one, no one is going to carry their AR15 in public on a routine basis, not even Kyle Rittenhouse. If you're going out in public, you need a concealed-carry permit and good-calibre handgun. (Yes, I know liberals want to ban those too, but, it's like their child-grooming efforts: a step at a time. They're not stupid.)

For home defense, a handgun or shotgun -- depending on your ease of using them -- is better than an AR15, in my personal opinion -- you don't want a .556 round travelling three hundred yards into the bedroom of your neighbor's children. Biden is right about that, in my opinion. But you can look at a dozen videos arguing both sides if you go to YouTube and put in 'AR15 vs Shotgun'.

So ... what's the point of an AR15 (or AK or any other 'assault rifle')? It's to partially fulfill the intent of the men who wrote the Second Amendment: that the people should be as well-armed as the government.

Of course, the advance of military technology over the last 250 years has made that impossible. You and a few neighbors with AR15s will not be a match for an A10, or even a Marine rifle company. Any conflict between civilian patriots and the government will be over in three days, and the last two of them will be spent putting the patriots in body bags.

However, unless the patriots are very very stupid -- 6 January level stupid, which is not ruled out, as 6 January itself showed -- there isn't going to be any conflict between the united, cohesive forces of the government, and the patriot movement. So long as the US is a law-governed democratic republic, or is believed to be that by a majority of its citizens, there must not be any armed conflict between patriots and the government.

What there could be is the disintegration of a cohesive government, and general chaos. We can think of a hundred different scenarios leading to this. In which case, patriots should be as well-armed as possible.

And of course every patriot who has not done his military service yet, and is under the age of 36, should enlist in the National Guard. (Army National Guard)

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

History proves time and time again......
A well armed society has a "well behaved" government...and when it misbehaves, those armed citizens can do their job

The "Point" of an AR-15 is to give the citizens some chance against tyrannical forces that may be better equipped, but would be hopelessly and vastly outnumbered. Remember that the US' superior capabilities still didn't prevail against a far lesser enemy in Vietnam and other conflicts.
Now given that government troops would be killing their own citizens on their own home land, the probability of collateral damage in terms of also killing government friendly citizens makes their task many times more difficult than Vietnam etc.
IF (a big if) enough American citizens decided enough is enough and were willing to defend their liberty, the government would have a hell of a hard time stopping them. Far harder than you might think. Factor in that many with access to advanced military weapons and vehicles might use them against the government.

Also, factor in China and Russia would likely use that time to attack targets that America has sworn to defend forcing military assets to be used overseas and against foreign attackers at the same time. I personally do not believe the government could pull it off and would be fractured to the point of being easily dismantled by Patriots at that point. Their ONLY chance government has is tricking citizens into willingly give up their arms through threats like taking away things and threats of prosecution. And that is precisely what the government is doing right now.

The US is entering a stage where government has become corrupted and tyrannical.
The most significant sign of this is it's current hard core push to disarm the citizens.

Right now, today is by far the most critical time in American history since 1776 that Americans must not give up their AR-15's or any weapons to government threats.

 

[miketx]

The basic argument of the Left, that 'assault rifles' are not necessary for personal defense, is correct. (Let's define 'assault rifle' as a semi-automatic rifle which can take magazines of 20 rounds or more, and whose rounds carry more than XXX foot-pounds of kinetic energy. [A gun enthusiast can fill in 'XXX' -- in otherwords, excluding a .22].)

I've seen posts positing a woman using one to fend off a rapist in a park, but, come one, no one is going to carry their AR15 in public on a routine basis, not even Kyle Rittenhouse. If you're going out in public, you need a concealed-carry permit and good-calibre handgun. (Yes, I know liberals want to ban those too, but, it's like their child-grooming efforts: a step at a time. They're not stupid.)

For home defense, a handgun or shotgun -- depending on your ease of using them -- is better than an AR15, in my personal opinion -- you don't want a .556 round travelling three hundred yards into the bedroom of your neighbor's children. Biden is right about that, in my opinion. But you can look at a dozen videos arguing both sides if you go to YouTube and put in 'AR15 vs Shotgun'.

So ... what's the point of an AR15 (or AK or any other 'assault rifle')? It's to partially fulfill the intent of the men who wrote the Second Amendment: that the people should be as well-armed as the government.

Of course, the advance of military technology over the last 250 years has made that impossible. You and a few neighbors with AR15s will not be a match for an A10, or even a Marine rifle company. Any conflict between civilian patriots and the government will be over in three days, and the last two of them will be spent putting the patriots in body bags.

However, unless the patriots are very very stupid -- 6 January level stupid, which is not ruled out, as 6 January itself showed -- there isn't going to be any conflict between the united, cohesive forces of the government, and the patriot movement. So long as the US is a law-governed democratic republic, or is believed to be that by a majority of its citizens, there must not be any armed conflict between patriots and the government.

What there could be is the disintegration of a cohesive government, and general chaos. We can think of a hundred different scenarios leading to this. In which case, patriots should be as well-armed as possible.

And of course every patriot who has not done his military service yet, and is under the age of 36, should enlist in the National Guard. (Army National Guard)

Assault rifles are select fire. We don't got any assault rifles.

 

[Magnus]

History proves time and time again......
A well armed society has a "well behaved" government...and when it misbehaves, those armed citizens can do their job

The "Point" of an AR-15 is to give the citizens some chance against tyrannical forces that may be better equipped, but would be hopelessly and vastly outnumbered. Remember that the USs' superior capabilities still didn't prevail against a far lesser enemy in Vietnam and other conflicts.

The US is entering a stage where government has become corrupted and tyrannical.

LOL Really? Afghanistan, Iraq...pretty much any M.E. countries prove you wrong. Same with half a dozen countries in Africa, South America, etc.

More guns = more anarchy. At least the OP had it right... a heavily well-armed citizen is still no match for any modern army.

Guns are nothing but adult toys. The more you have, the more you want. And, that's ok. It's your money after all. A fool and his money...

But don't push the usual pablum about Second Amendment rights. Only self-delusion idiots buy into that stuff.

 

[miketx]

LOL Really? Afghanistan, Iraq...pretty much any M.E. countries prove you wrong. Same with half a dozen countries in Africa, South America, etc.

More guns = more anarchy. At least the OP had it right... a heavily well-armed citizen is still no match for any modern army.

Guns are nothing but adult toys. The more you have, the more you want. And, that's ok. It's your money after all. A fool and his money...

But don't push the usual pablum about Second Amendment rights. Only self-delusion idiots buy into that stuff.

Damn, howler monkeys spew bullshit. Come take them.

 

[Magnus]

Damn, howler monkeys spew bullshit. Come take them.

Why should I take them? Don't need 'em. Go ahead, keep buying more and wasting your money. Fuck I care.

But it is fun to see you idiots spend hundreds on guns and then cry that your groceries went up by 5c.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Damn, howler monkeys spew bullshit. Come take them.

They won't come take them.....
They WILL however pressure you with insane edicts and EO's giving you 'X" amount of time to comply or else.

They will take assets, seize property, freeze bank accounts, make us felons, revoke rights and use all kinds of trickery and evil to do it.
No shots may ever be fired. I think this was the main reason for empowering the IRS with so many new soldiers.

They have used their super computers to play out the scenario many times and know they cannot win an all out armed conflict against their own homeland.
This is why they will do it through the backdoor. It's their only chance...... forcing us to comply on our own accord through fear.

Granted...resistance may become VERY difficult and there are so many Law Enforcement and Military who will be more than willing to go after the citizens.
Unfortunately, It is likely that most (75-80% ???) will succumb to the fear and comply without a fight.
They mistakenly believe that if they comply they will be left alone and keep what they have. They are making a massive mistake and judgement error.
They will still lose everything even faster. There is no "free ride"

 

[Harry Dresden]

Why should I take them? Don't need 'em. Go ahead, keep buying more and wasting your money. Fuck I care.

But it is fun to see you idiots spend hundreds on guns and then cry that your groceries went up by 5c.

5 cents?.....how i wish...were do you live?...

 

[Magnus]

5 cents?.....how i wish...were do you live?...

Where do you live? And how much have your groceries gone up by? And, while you are at it, do tell us how much you spent on guns so far. Go.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The basic argument of the Left, that 'assault rifles' are not necessary for personal defense, is correct. (Let's define 'assault rifle' as a semi-automatic rifle which can take magazines of 20 rounds or more, and whose rounds carry more than XXX foot-pounds of kinetic energy. [A gun enthusiast can fill in 'XXX' -- in otherwords, excluding a .22].)

I've seen posts positing a woman using one to fend off a rapist in a park, but, come one, no one is going to carry their AR15 in public on a routine basis, not even Kyle Rittenhouse. If you're going out in public, you need a concealed-carry permit and good-calibre handgun. (Yes, I know liberals want to ban those too, but, it's like their child-grooming efforts: a step at a time. They're not stupid.)

For home defense, a handgun or shotgun -- depending on your ease of using them -- is better than an AR15, in my personal opinion -- you don't want a .556 round travelling three hundred yards into the bedroom of your neighbor's children. Biden is right about that, in my opinion. But you can look at a dozen videos arguing both sides if you go to YouTube and put in 'AR15 vs Shotgun'.

So ... what's the point of an AR15 (or AK or any other 'assault rifle')? It's to partially fulfill the intent of the men who wrote the Second Amendment: that the people should be as well-armed as the government.

Of course, the advance of military technology over the last 250 years has made that impossible. You and a few neighbors with AR15s will not be a match for an A10, or even a Marine rifle company. Any conflict between civilian patriots and the government will be over in three days, and the last two of them will be spent putting the patriots in body bags.

However, unless the patriots are very very stupid -- 6 January level stupid, which is not ruled out, as 6 January itself showed -- there isn't going to be any conflict between the united, cohesive forces of the government, and the patriot movement. So long as the US is a law-governed democratic republic, or is believed to be that by a majority of its citizens, there must not be any armed conflict between patriots and the government.

What there could be is the disintegration of a cohesive government, and general chaos. We can think of a hundred different scenarios leading to this. In which case, patriots should be as well-armed as possible.

And of course every patriot who has not done his military service yet, and is under the age of 36, should enlist in the National Guard. (Army National Guard)

'assault rifle' as a semi-automatic rifle which can take magazines of 20 rounds or more, and whose rounds carry more than XXX foot-pounds of kinetic energy.

Are you Sheila Jackson Lee?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

5 cents?.....how i wish...were do you live?...

He / she is most likely cuddled so far up the governments ass and living happily off the crumbs there.

 

[BothWings]

Why did Nazis disarm their political enemies? Obviously to make it easier to overtake them. Gun control was a precursor to both Kristalnacht and Blitzkrieg. FACT.

 

[whitehall]

Hardly a current event but more like a hodge podge opinion about semi-auto rifles.

 

[Magnus]

He / she is most likely cuddled so far up the governments ass and living happily off the crumbs there.

Work for the government? Why the fuck would I? Happily employed in the IT private sector. How about you?

 

[rightwinger]

A well armed society has a "well behaved" government...and when it misbehaves, those armed citizens can do their job

Our society has a Constitution, a free press, free speech and a right to vote which has protected us against tyranny for over 240 years

We have not once needed armed citizens to protect us…..EVER

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Work for the government? Why the fuck would I? Happily employed in the IT private sector. How about you?

But financially supported by your wife / husband who does ?

 

[Harry Dresden]

Where do you live? And how much have your groceries gone up by? And, while you are at it, do tell us how much you spent on guns so far. Go.

what used to cost me 80 bucks is now costing about 120 bucks......and i dont by guns....i dont need them....

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Our society has a Constitution, a free press, free speech and a right to vote which has protected us against tyranny for over 240 years

We have not once needed armed citizens to protect us…..EVER

1776, 2023

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

what used to cost me 80 bucks is now costing about 120 bucks......and i dont by guns....i dont need them....

By the end of 2023 you will likely only wish you could get what you can today for $120.
The spending and printing of money combined with the flood of illegals and offshoring of jobs and manufacturing is totally unsustainable.
Our government has over spent to the point of no return and thinks it can tax it's way out of the corner.

Collapse will probably occur this year. I don't see any remaining Federal Reserve trickery and manipulation that can support the inevitable.
They have played all their hands.
Inflation is not "under control", it is about to explode violently.

 

[blackhawk]

What I find fascinating is that when it comes to guns and gun violence so many want to focus on the AR-15 or semi automatic rifles in general when the vast majority of gun crime and violence is done with handguns.