Zone1 There's no rational, reasoned argument for a ban on AR15s (2)

[ralfy]

No. Its a direct, literal statement.
There is zero practical or effective difference between the AR15 and any other semi-automatic cnterfire rifle.

Add pistols.

It's like the "they're the same picture meme." LOL.

 

[ralfy]

Ah.... pedantry masquerading as sophistry.

Pedantry masquerading as sophistry....to cover mistakes.

 

[BoostedHayabusa]

You certainly don’t need to do something as dangerous as racing a motorcycle. Destroy it and if you need transportation buy a moped or Vespa.

Turn in your war weapons

 

[ralfy]

"The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,”
Your opinion does not matter.

Stack up. Try it.

"The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,”

The exercise of 2nd amendment rights are not subject to a demonstration of need.

The right to bear arms is based on the natural right to defend oneself, following English common law. That means the right to bear arms exists even without 2A.

2A used that right to defend oneself to justify the formation of state and regulated militias.

However, rights may be abridged for various reasons.

Your point makes no sense at all.

 

[ralfy]

You are confused Moon Bat.

The Heller decision put that puppy to bed. The right to keep and bear arms is an individual right and not dependent upon being a member of any organization.

Dick Heller was denied his right to keep a firearm in his own home and the filthy Democrat lawyers used the Militia clause as an argument for DC prevail. However, the Supremes determined that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. It was reaffirmed in the McDonald and Bruen decisions.

What else you got Moon Bat?

The right to bear arms is based on the natural right to defend oneself. The framers came up with 2A to use that to justify state and regulated militias. The latter is explained in Art. 1 Sec. 8 of the Constitution and the Militia Acts.

Meanwhile, rights may be abridged for one reason or another, e.g., minors not allowed to own firearms, prisoners, too, etc.

 

[ralfy]

Considering the AR-15 is not an "Assault Rifle," we get to keep those....right?

Depends on state laws, etc.

 

[ralfy]

I served in the Military as have most of my family and the entire time the AR-15 has been on the market none of us were issued one. Your wanting to ban a firearm because of it's appearance not how it functions. The AR-15 is functionally no different than a semi-auto .227 hunting rifle.

Pointless to talk about oneself in a forum that doesn't require ID and background verification. Better to give sources as evidence. Still, the point isn't that it's no different from a hunting rifle. Rather, the claim is that it's no different from any other firearm.

 

[ralfy]

An AR-15 is not an M-16. This gun is legal everywhere. It shoots 5.56mm NATO round--is it an "assault" weapon. STFU, you're ignorant.

This is the point made:



See also,

What makes the AR-15 style rifle the weapon of choice for mass shooters?

Some of the worst massacres in recent memory have had something in common: the AR-15 style rifle. Scott Pelley reports on why the high-velocity rounds used in the gun make it so deadly.

www.cbsnews.com

This is a 9-millimeter bullet from a handgun, which we captured in slow motion. The handgun bullet traveled about 800 miles an hour. It sliced nearly straight all the way through the gel.

...

It's three times faster and struck with more than twice the force. The shockwave of the AR-15 bullet blasted a large cavity in the gel unlike the bullet from the handgun.

That involved a test in a ballistics lab at USC.

The others interviewed included a trauma surgeon and medical director.

The counterargument is that this rifle is no different from a handgun.

 

[Flash]

The right to bear arms is based on the natural right to defend oneself. The framers came up with 2A to use that to justify state and regulated militias. The latter is explained in Art. 1 Sec. 8 of the Constitution and the Militia Acts.

Meanwhile, rights may be abridged for one reason or another, e.g., minors not allowed to own firearms, prisoners, too, etc.

The issue of belonging to an organized militia to have the right to keep and bear arms was put to bed by the Heller case and reaffirmed with McDonald and Bruen. The right to keep and bear arms is an individual right the same as the right to free speech or the right of religion and is not dependent upon belonging to any organization. To have the right all you have to be is a US citizen. That is settled law.

 

[2aguy]

This is the point made:



See also,

What makes the AR-15 style rifle the weapon of choice for mass shooters?

Some of the worst massacres in recent memory have had something in common: the AR-15 style rifle. Scott Pelley reports on why the high-velocity rounds used in the gun make it so deadly.

www.cbsnews.com

That involved a test in a ballistics lab at USC.

The others interviewed included a trauma surgeon and medical director.

The counterargument is that this rifle is no different from a handgun.

No…….we told you the AR-15 is no different from any other semi-automatic rifle and that all semi-automatic guns operate the same way……one bullet fired for each pull of the trigger…..

Get that right first…..

Then….

We told you that at the ranges of mass public shootings the gun does not matter……the advantages of a rifle only mattered in Las Vegas where the distance was 400 yards………

When inside a building, any gun will kill…….rifle, pistol or shotgun……

The most important point that you just will not understand is that the only thing that determines how many die is how much free time the killer has in the gun free zone before someone with another gun forces the killer to stop killing unarmed victims…

As to ballistic gel tests…..?

Try loading up the ballistic gel test of 12 gauge shotgun shells and shotgun slugs……….then get back to us about the AR-15 vs a shotgun in a mass public shooting……

You know so little about so little, and you know it with such passion….it makes you dangerous to our freedom in this country.

 

[2aguy]

This is the point made:



See also,

What makes the AR-15 style rifle the weapon of choice for mass shooters?

Some of the worst massacres in recent memory have had something in common: the AR-15 style rifle. Scott Pelley reports on why the high-velocity rounds used in the gun make it so deadly.

www.cbsnews.com

That involved a test in a ballistics lab at USC.

The others interviewed included a trauma surgeon and medical director.

The counterargument is that this rifle is no different from a handgun.

Here.....try this....





Now......

.223 one typical round used in the AR-15 vs. 30.06




Against a mock up of the human head......

Notice again the shotgun and what it does.......

Notice what the 30.06 does as well.....

 

[2aguy]

This is the point made:



See also,

What makes the AR-15 style rifle the weapon of choice for mass shooters?

Some of the worst massacres in recent memory have had something in common: the AR-15 style rifle. Scott Pelley reports on why the high-velocity rounds used in the gun make it so deadly.

www.cbsnews.com

That involved a test in a ballistics lab at USC.

The others interviewed included a trauma surgeon and medical director.

The counterargument is that this rifle is no different from a handgun.

Now........

What you don', and won't and refuse to understand, is that again, it isn't the gun that matters in a mass public shooting.....

What matters is how much free time the killer has in the gun free zone they attack....before someone with a gun makes them stop shooting unarmed victims........

Nashville

AR-15 rifle 6 killed


Cumbria shooting in Britain...

...no semi-auto rifle...... Double barrel shotgun, bolt action rifle

13 killed, 11 injured....


Kerch, Russia

5 shot, pump action shotgun, not a rifle, no magazine

20 killed

Navy Yard shooting

5 shot, pump action shotgun,not a rifle, no magazine

12 killed


Santa Fe, High school shooting

No rifle, pump action shotgun, .38 caliber revolver

10 killed

Luby's Cafe

24 killed, 2 pistols

Virgina Tech

32 people killed, 2 pistols.

The gun does not determine how many are killed and you have been explained this over and over

The amount of time the killer has in a gun free zone before someone shoota and stops them determines how many get killed as the two example above show.


==========
From 1982....various attacks.....most done without rifles, you twit.


Gilroy, semi-auto rifle with large magazine....3 killed

Dayton, democrat, socialist, antifa member, elizabeth warren supporter, semi-auto rifle with regular magazine....9 killed.

Umpquaa Community college shooting....5 pistols, 9 killed

Charleston Church shooting, 9 dead, 1 pistol.

Atlanta spree shooting.... 9 dead 3 pistols

Red Lake shooting 10 dead 2 pistols.

Santa Fe High school shooting...no rifle, no magazine.....shot gun and .38 revolver... 10 killed

Russian Polytechnic school shooting.... no rifle, no magazine.....tube fed, 5 shot, pump action shotgun....20 killed, 40 injured.

Navy Yard shooting.... no rifle, no magazine, tube fed pump action shotgun, 5,6 or 7 shot pump action shotgun....12 killed

Virginia Tech.... 32 people killed, 2 pistols.

Luby's cafe.... 24 killed, 2 pistols

British, Cumbria shooting....no semi-auto rifle...... Double barrel shotgun, bolt action rifle 13 killed, 11 injured....

Fort Hood....1 pistol....13 killed

Virginia beach...2 pistols .... 12 killed

 

[2aguy]

But that's not the point, right? You keep claiming that there's no difference between it and anything else. Nice try.

And you ignore the actual points made.........

 

[2aguy]

That's what he was trying to point out throughout, and even added that anyone who claims otherwise knows nothing about firearms.

Meanwhile, the ones interviewed in the video included firearms experts and even doctors who treated gunshot wounds.

Apparently, the anon forum user is more knowledgeable than any of them.

Anti-gunners who want the rifle banned........yeah, let's take their word for it.......

And again, the qanon thing is done...the democrat party changed the smear for republicans because qanon didn't work...no one knows what you are talking about other than the democrats who made up the smear....the smear now is "Christian Nationalist."

Please pay attention to democrat party talking points....

 

[M14 Shooter]

Add pistols.

OK.
Rifles are more powerful than pistols.
Water: wet.
So?

 

[M14 Shooter]

The right to bear arms is based on the natural right to defend oneself, following English common law. That means the right to bear arms exists even without 2A.

Correct.

2A used that right to defend oneself to justify the formation of state and regulated militias.

Not sure what you mean by this.

However, rights may be abridged for various reasons.

So long as those restrictions are consistent with the constitution.

Your point makes no sense at all.

Likewise.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

AR is designed for one purpose only. Killing. Weapon of war

AR-15 ‘designed to kill people’

Though I have spent much of my career as a photojournalist, I must offer a perspective from my United States Air Force basic training in 1965. On a cold and misty morning at Lackland Air Force Base in...

www.the-journal.com

No one in my family was ever issued an AR-15. No country in the world fields the AR-15 so you are full of shit.

 

[BoostedHayabusa]

No one in my family was ever issued an AR-15. No country in the world fields the AR-15 so you are full of shit.

Come on Man, read the story.. M-16... you know darn well the AR-15 is an Assault Rifle and has no business in the hands of civilians.
Turn your weapons of war in.

 

[Concerned American]

Did they ask mass shooters and ask them what their choice was?

If past events are an indication, I'd say it is clear. The AR-15 has NOT been the choice of mass shooters in the US. This is well documented. Try again.

 

[2aguy]

Come on Man, read the story.. M-16... you know darn well the AR-15 is an Assault Rifle and has no business in the hands of civilians.
Turn your weapons of war in.

No...it isn't....no matter how much you guys lie about that rifle, in the hopes to use it as the gateway gun to ban all the other semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns, it will never be a military rifle.....

The FOIA request itself was prompted from a Nov. 2017 article in The Atlantic in which the magazine, unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with its anti-gun bent, attempted to bolster a claim that “these rifles were meant for the military, not civilians.”

“Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963.

It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the ‘Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle’ began on Jan 2, 1964,” one critic of the article contended.

“The M16 wasn’t issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn’t standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn’t officially replace the M14 until 1969.”

Original ATF AR-15 Classification Refutes Claim that Rifle ‘Not Meant’ for Civilians