Why Liberals Want To Ban The AR-15

[bigrebnc1775]

I jumped the gun...so what is your position? Ban or No ban?

no ban

Okay, no ban. But Regulation then.

2nd amendment fruit loops

The 2nd amendment pretty well is against the banning but not the regulation as long as it's not done by the Feds. That pretty well agrees with the modern court rulings.

All levels of government are equally subject to Second Amendment case law – Federal, state, and local.

Case law? ok U.S. vs. Miller 1939
The Supreme Court ruled that in order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment, it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, in common use of the time, and supplied by the citizen.
So tell me what firearm is there that is in common use that would have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia?

 

[sparky]

so libs want to ban an AR-15

can the gun nuts here tell me why anyone would need one?

~S~

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Oh, whoops...me and that stupid critical thinking shit. Sorry, you’re right, ban them and trample on our Constitution on FEELZ alone.

Im right about banning them? I never said I wanted to ban them. You have serious reading comprehension problems.

I jumped the gun...so what is your position? Ban or No ban?

no ban

Okay, no ban. But Regulation then.

Of course, AR 15s aren’t actually ‘banned’ anywhere – you can own an AR 15 in New York State, for example.

Now, your New York legal AR 15 won’t have a 30-round detachable magazine, it will have a fixed ten-round top-loading magazine, among other features, or the lack thereof.

But it will have the same BCG, FCG, and DI operating system as any other AR.

that magazine restriction is illegal to restrict the function of a rifle is not efficient for a militia nor is it reasonable

 

[bigrebnc1775]

so libs want to ban an AR-15

can the gun nuts here tell me why anyone would need one?

~S~

You tone you god damn insult down you fucking nut case and I'll answer you nutbag question

 

[Slade3200]

That’s because the OP is a liar.

The sophistry of the thread premise is predicated on the lie that ‘liberals’ want to ‘ban’ all guns, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Leftists do want to ban all guns liar. Back in the 80's they wanted to ban handguns but gun control tards knew that was a fight they would lose. So they went for the AR but couldn't get enough votes to outright ban them.
You can say no one wants to take all gus all you want nothing could be further from the truth.

I dont want to ban all guns. I get called a lefty all the time. How does that add into your theory?

If you want to ban one you're just as bad as any leftist

but you just called somebody a liar because you claimed that lefties want to ban all guns. How about some humility and you just admit that you were not being honest.

Leftist do want to ban all guns that the fucking plan you dumb son of bitch

I just said that I do t want ban all guns. So how does that factor in. Does that mean I’m not a Leftist?

 

[Hum Dinger]

The AR-15 was originally designed as the Armalite AR-15 (aka the M-16):

ArmaLite AR-15 - Wikipedia

This was designed as a military weapon with devastating firepower - far greater than any reasonable civilian weapon.

"had to penetrate a standard U.S. M1 helmet at 500 yards (460 meters) and retain a velocity in excess of the speed of sound, while matching or exceeding the wounding ability of the .30 Carbine cartridge"

That doesn't sound like a defensive weapon or a hunting rifle now does it?

 

[Slade3200]

How about you list the biggest mass shootings in the US over the past few years and the type of weapon used... I’m not talking about gang homicides in Chicago, I’m talking about mass shootings in public forums... you obviously need to do the research so have fun.

Here....

Las Vegas....rifle with magazine 58 killed

Virginia Tech....2 pistols.....38 killed

Luby's Cafe.....2 pistols 24 killed...

Russian Polytechnich shooting, 5 shot, tube fed, pump action shotgun...20 killed, 40 injured

It isn't the weapon, it is the location of the attack and how long the shooter can kill before someone with a gun shoots back to stop him.

Why did you leave out all the shootings that involved AR15s? If you want to be taken seriously then don’t be so blatantly slanted in your responses. Direct and honest answer will earn respect. Spin like your last reply will not

Less people are killed with an AR than with a vehicle or even a bat
Now what?

How about you list the biggest mass shootings in the US over the past few years and the type of weapon used... I’m not talking about gang homicides in Chicago, I’m talking about mass shootings in public forums... you obviously need to do the research so have fun.

Here....

Las Vegas....rifle with magazine 58 killed

Virginia Tech....2 pistols.....38 killed

Luby's Cafe.....2 pistols 24 killed...

Russian Polytechnich shooting, 5 shot, tube fed, pump action shotgun...20 killed, 40 injured

It isn't the weapon, it is the location of the attack and how long the shooter can kill before someone with a gun shoots back to stop him.

Why did you leave out all the shootings that involved AR15s? If you want to be taken seriously then don’t be so blatantly slanted in your responses. Direct and honest answer will earn respect. Spin like your last reply will not

Less people are killed with an AR than with a vehicle or even a bat
Now what?

Now what what? I’m not making an argument for or against the AR I’m explaining the main reason why people support banning it. An obvious point that the OP left out. You don’t seem to be following the discussion.

If you're trying to make a good argument you're failing.

What is the point that I’m making? I’d like to see if you even come close to showing that you understand

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Here....

Las Vegas....rifle with magazine 58 killed

Virginia Tech....2 pistols.....38 killed

Luby's Cafe.....2 pistols 24 killed...

Russian Polytechnich shooting, 5 shot, tube fed, pump action shotgun...20 killed, 40 injured

It isn't the weapon, it is the location of the attack and how long the shooter can kill before someone with a gun shoots back to stop him.

Why did you leave out all the shootings that involved AR15s? If you want to be taken seriously then don’t be so blatantly slanted in your responses. Direct and honest answer will earn respect. Spin like your last reply will not

Less people are killed with an AR than with a vehicle or even a bat
Now what?

Here....

Las Vegas....rifle with magazine 58 killed

Virginia Tech....2 pistols.....38 killed

Luby's Cafe.....2 pistols 24 killed...

Russian Polytechnich shooting, 5 shot, tube fed, pump action shotgun...20 killed, 40 injured

It isn't the weapon, it is the location of the attack and how long the shooter can kill before someone with a gun shoots back to stop him.

Why did you leave out all the shootings that involved AR15s? If you want to be taken seriously then don’t be so blatantly slanted in your responses. Direct and honest answer will earn respect. Spin like your last reply will not

Less people are killed with an AR than with a vehicle or even a bat
Now what?

Now what what? I’m not making an argument for or against the AR I’m explaining the main reason why people support banning it. An obvious point that the OP left out. You don’t seem to be following the discussion.

If you're trying to make a good argument you're failing.

What is the point that I’m making? I’d like to see if you even come close to showing that you understand

You're failing at trying to make a point that's my point.

Leftists do want to ban all guns liar. Back in the 80's they wanted to ban handguns but gun control tards knew that was a fight they would lose. So they went for the AR but couldn't get enough votes to outright ban them.
You can say no one wants to take all gus all you want nothing could be further from the truth.

I dont want to ban all guns. I get called a lefty all the time. How does that add into your theory?

If you want to ban one you're just as bad as any leftist

but you just called somebody a liar because you claimed that lefties want to ban all guns. How about some humility and you just admit that you were not being honest.

Leftist do want to ban all guns that the fucking plan you dumb son of bitch

I just said that I do t want ban all guns. So how does that factor in. Does that mean I’m not a Leftist?

WOW like all leftist they say one thing get what they want and move on and go for more
You're lying when you say you only want to ban one gun

 

[OKTexas]

That's a lie. Hand guns are used in most mass shootings.

.

I wasn’t lying.. just stating an observation

Yeah, an observation that has been debunked in every thread on firearms. I'm sure I've seen you in at least a couple of them. So what would you call an observation that has been proven to be untrue?

.

im not twisting numbers to form a narrative just providing the most obvious reason for supporting regulation by most people. They hear AR15 and think of most the major mass shootings we’ve had in the USA. Schools, night clubs, churches... that’s why they support regulation. The OP left out the most obvious point.

And the only reason people think that way is due to propaganda pushed by the commiecrats and their lackey media. ARs have lower body counts than fist, feet and clubs, they just get all the publicity. Studies show the last AW ban had no measurable effect on crime. It's all planned to eventually disarm law abiding citizens. That's why I say, NO MORE COMPROMISE!!!!!!!!!!

.

How about you list the biggest mass shootings in the US over the past few years and the type of weapon used... I’m not talking about gang homicides in Chicago, I’m talking about mass shootings in public forums... you obviously need to do the research so have fun.

No, I don't need to do any research, you're doing the same thing the commies and media are doing, concentrating on the outliers that account for a very small percentage of overall homicides. Of course their solution is to disadvantage millions of law abiding Americans. I ain't buying it.

.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The AR-15 was originally designed as the Armalite AR-15 (aka the M-16):

ArmaLite AR-15 - Wikipedia

This was designed as a military weapon with devastating firepower - far greater than any reasonable civilian weapon.

"had to penetrate a standard U.S. M1 helmet at 500 yards (460 meters) and retain a velocity in excess of the speed of sound, while matching or exceeding the wounding ability of the .30 Carbine cartridge"

That doesn't sound like a defensive weapon or a hunting rifle now does it?

AR's have a purpose and it is to kill as efficiently as possible
They also serve a purpose by keeping my rights where I want them.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I wasn’t lying.. just stating an observation

Yeah, an observation that has been debunked in every thread on firearms. I'm sure I've seen you in at least a couple of them. So what would you call an observation that has been proven to be untrue?

.

im not twisting numbers to form a narrative just providing the most obvious reason for supporting regulation by most people. They hear AR15 and think of most the major mass shootings we’ve had in the USA. Schools, night clubs, churches... that’s why they support regulation. The OP left out the most obvious point.

And the only reason people think that way is due to propaganda pushed by the commiecrats and their lackey media. ARs have lower body counts than fist, feet and clubs, they just get all the publicity. Studies show the last AW ban had no measurable effect on crime. It's all planned to eventually disarm law abiding citizens. That's why I say, NO MORE COMPROMISE!!!!!!!!!!

.

How about you list the biggest mass shootings in the US over the past few years and the type of weapon used... I’m not talking about gang homicides in Chicago, I’m talking about mass shootings in public forums... you obviously need to do the research so have fun.

No, I don't need to do any research, you're doing the same thing the commies and media are doing, concentrating on the outliers that account for a very small percentage of overall homicides. Of course their solution is to disadvantage millions of law abiding Americans. I ain't buying it.

.

Nor am I

 

[OKTexas]

You might want to check you stats, you're way off.

You are as ignorant as you are uninformed. But I repeat myself.

edit...My apologies. You are right, I meant to say around half of all US homicides are committed with handguns. They should be severely restricted in order to lower that rate.

Damn, are you not reading the thread, the real numbers have been posted a couple of times.

“In 2010, 358 murders were reported involving a rifle while 6,009 were reported involving a handgun; another 1,939 were reported with an unspecified type of firearm.

Can you do math?

.

Can you read? Where are all homicides given?

If those aren't the numbers you were referring to, how about you provide the numbers to back up your claim.

.

 

[Hum Dinger]

The AR-15 was originally designed as the Armalite AR-15 (aka the M-16):

ArmaLite AR-15 - Wikipedia

This was designed as a military weapon with devastating firepower - far greater than any reasonable civilian weapon.

"had to penetrate a standard U.S. M1 helmet at 500 yards (460 meters) and retain a velocity in excess of the speed of sound, while matching or exceeding the wounding ability of the .30 Carbine cartridge"

That doesn't sound like a defensive weapon or a hunting rifle now does it?

AR's have a purpose and it is to kill as efficiently as possible
They also serve a purpose by keeping my rights where I want them.

If "efficient killing" is your goal then you do then you do not deserve any rights at all.

You belong in a mental institution.

 

[BrokeLoser]

so libs want to ban an AR-15

can the gun nuts here tell me why anyone would need one?

~S~

For the same reason I “needed” this.

Because I can...that’s why.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The AR-15 was originally designed as the Armalite AR-15 (aka the M-16):

ArmaLite AR-15 - Wikipedia

This was designed as a military weapon with devastating firepower - far greater than any reasonable civilian weapon.

"had to penetrate a standard U.S. M1 helmet at 500 yards (460 meters) and retain a velocity in excess of the speed of sound, while matching or exceeding the wounding ability of the .30 Carbine cartridge"

That doesn't sound like a defensive weapon or a hunting rifle now does it?

AR's have a purpose and it is to kill as efficiently as possible
They also serve a purpose by keeping my rights where I want them.

If "efficient killing" is your goal then you do then you do not deserve any rights at all.

You belong in a mental institution.

You do not deserve firearm ownership because your thinking will just get your firearm taken from you and your life taken by the one who took it
What is your qualitative experience in the use of deadly force? What gives you the ability to have an opinion on what an individual needs to prevail in a fight for their life?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

so libs want to ban an AR-15

can the gun nuts here tell me why anyone would need one?

~S~

For the same reason I “needed” this.

Because I can...that’s why.

Why did you give a response to the nut case?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

***\\\This Is My Opinion///***

I believe Liberals want to ban the AR-15 for two reasons...

1. The AR-15 is scary looking, it's that simple. The AR-15 is scary looking and it's easy to get people to think the AR-15 is bad because of the way it looks.

2. Here's the main reason why Liberals want to ban the AR-15. If Liberals are successful, they can then point to other guns as more powerful and say "We banned the AR-15 so we should ban all of these other weapons because they are more powerful and accurate."

That's why the big push to ban the AR-15.

And you are wrong. No other gun, freely available to civilians, is designed for or capable of killing as many people as possible in as short a time as possible as the AR-15.

Abortion Doctors kill a lot more innocent people than AR15s.

Obama's Drone Strikes killed more innocent people thsn AR15s.

I could go on. Point is, you don't give a damn about innocent lives.

You don’t have a point, just a failed attempt to deflect – if you go on, you’ll look even more ignorant and ridiculous.

You’re incorrectly assuming that anyone who advocates for the banning of AR 15s is also an advocate of abortion – when in fact that’s not the case.

You’re incorrectly assuming that anyone who advocates for the banning of AR 15s also voted for or supported Obama – when in fact that’s not the case.

Neither a woman’s right to privacy nor a given president’s policy with regard to combating terrorism in any manner undermines or mitigates an individual’s concern for the loss of innocent lives.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You might want to check you stats, you're way off.

You are as ignorant as you are uninformed. But I repeat myself.

edit...My apologies. You are right, I meant to say around half of all US homicides are committed with handguns. They should be severely restricted in order to lower that rate.

They are severely regulated in cities that have the highest gun deaths in the nation.

 

[Slade3200]

Why did you leave out all the shootings that involved AR15s? If you want to be taken seriously then don’t be so blatantly slanted in your responses. Direct and honest answer will earn respect. Spin like your last reply will not

Less people are killed with an AR than with a vehicle or even a bat
Now what?

Why did you leave out all the shootings that involved AR15s? If you want to be taken seriously then don’t be so blatantly slanted in your responses. Direct and honest answer will earn respect. Spin like your last reply will not

Less people are killed with an AR than with a vehicle or even a bat
Now what?

Now what what? I’m not making an argument for or against the AR I’m explaining the main reason why people support banning it. An obvious point that the OP left out. You don’t seem to be following the discussion.

If you're trying to make a good argument you're failing.

What is the point that I’m making? I’d like to see if you even come close to showing that you understand

You're failing at trying to make a point that's my point.

I dont want to ban all guns. I get called a lefty all the time. How does that add into your theory?

If you want to ban one you're just as bad as any leftist

but you just called somebody a liar because you claimed that lefties want to ban all guns. How about some humility and you just admit that you were not being honest.

Leftist do want to ban all guns that the fucking plan you dumb son of bitch

I just said that I do t want ban all guns. So how does that factor in. Does that mean I’m not a Leftist?

WOW like all leftist they say one thing get what they want and move on and go for more
You're lying when you say you only want to ban one gun

I just asked for you to show understanding by restating my point as you understand it and your response was that I’m failing?! Is that joke. Can you not answer the question?

 

[Slade3200]

I wasn’t lying.. just stating an observation

Yeah, an observation that has been debunked in every thread on firearms. I'm sure I've seen you in at least a couple of them. So what would you call an observation that has been proven to be untrue?

.

im not twisting numbers to form a narrative just providing the most obvious reason for supporting regulation by most people. They hear AR15 and think of most the major mass shootings we’ve had in the USA. Schools, night clubs, churches... that’s why they support regulation. The OP left out the most obvious point.

And the only reason people think that way is due to propaganda pushed by the commiecrats and their lackey media. ARs have lower body counts than fist, feet and clubs, they just get all the publicity. Studies show the last AW ban had no measurable effect on crime. It's all planned to eventually disarm law abiding citizens. That's why I say, NO MORE COMPROMISE!!!!!!!!!!

.

How about you list the biggest mass shootings in the US over the past few years and the type of weapon used... I’m not talking about gang homicides in Chicago, I’m talking about mass shootings in public forums... you obviously need to do the research so have fun.

No, I don't need to do any research, you're doing the same thing the commies and media are doing, concentrating on the outliers that account for a very small percentage of overall homicides. Of course their solution is to disadvantage millions of law abiding Americans. I ain't buying it.

.

If I’m being dishonest then win the argument by showing a list of the largest mass shootings over the past few years and the guns that were used. Just give an honest response. No spin