Why Liberals Want To Ban The AR-15

[2aguy]

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?

Yes...it is the perfect civilian rifle......just ask these women...

Female Gun Owners: We Prefer the AR-15

Speaking with the Washington Free Beacon on Friday, five female firearm owners and advocates said the AR-15 platform offers several features that are ideal for women specifically. Robyn M. Sandoval, executive director of A Girl & A Gun Women's Shooting League, said the rifle is both more effective and safer for female shooters.

"ARs are an excellent choice for women for home defense," Sandoval told the Free Beacon. "The platform is relatively lightweight and easy to hold and customize so that the firearm fits her body correctly. Having a rifle that is the right size for the shooter makes it more comfortable to shoot and therefore more accurate and safer."

Many Democratic politicians, including 2020 frontrunner Joe Biden, have long decried the AR-15 as both dangerous and an impractical or unnecessary firearm for civilians, especially women. But the female firearm owners the Free Beacon spoke to rejected the logic of these pro-gun-control men.

"AR-15s are perfect for women," Mary Chastain, a writer and gun owner, said. "Despite the size, they are lightweight and have hardly any kickback. This allows us to aim well and shoot the target where we want to."

Dana Loesch, a nationally syndicated radio host and gun-rights activist who has faced threats to her safety throughout her career, said she picks an AR-15 when it comes to home defense.

"I was always taught in training that your pistol is what you use to get to your rifle, and the AR-15 is what I choose to use," Loesch told the Free Beacon.

The customizability of the rifle is a big selling point for women, competitive shooter and trainer Julie Golob said.

"The AR platform can be a useful and effective option for women when it comes to defending themselves and their property," she told the Free Beacon. "Starting with the fact that the length of pull can be adjusted easily, unlike rifles with fixed stocks, the AR can quickly become custom fit to its user. The pistol grip, combined with quick access to the safety and other controls, makes this platform one a woman can confidently control."

"I can choose my trigger, hand guard, barrel length, grip," Dianna Muller, a former police officer and head of the gun-rights group DC Project, added. "I can put a light, laser, etc. I call it the Mr. Potato Head for the gun connoisseur!"

-----

Chastain also said that she finds the AR-15 easier than many other firearms to use.

"You can use it with one hand, which helps me," she said. "My entire left side is handicapped, caused by brain trauma at birth. There are many guns I cannot use. The AR is perfect because I can use the functions with only my right hand. The lightness of the gun makes it easy for my handicapped left arm and hand to hold it."

 

[2aguy]

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

There are over 18 million AR-15 rifles in private hands in the United States...

In 2018 there were a total of 5 attacks with rifles, either AK-47 civilian models or AR-15s, which are civilian rifles.........

Total killed with rifles in mass public shootings.... 39 people.

numbers killed in the attacks...

4
11
4
3
17

Virginia Tech...2, 9mm pistols....32 killed.
Luby's Cafe... 2 pistols, 24 killed

Notice.....in only one of those attacks did the killer with the rifle kill more people than one of the guys with the pump action shotgun......

..the Russian shooter....Killed 20, injured 40 with a tube fed, 5 shot, pump action shotgun.

The Navy Yard shooter killed 12 with a pump action shotgun..

The Santa Fe shooter used a pump action shotgun and .38 revolver and killed 10

You don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Uncensored2008]

so libs want to ban an AR-15

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

~S~

With the exposure of DNC hack Eric Ciaramella as the fraudulent "whistleblower" the latest attempt at the coup to undo the 2016 election has failed. Pelosi will shut it down. The desperation of democrats to undo the election and protect the embezzlement of foreign aid payments by the well connected is at a fevered pitch.Every trick the democrats have tried has failed.

One last ditch effort by the democrats, assassinate president Trump. WE ALL know you're going to try it. IF you succeed, we ALL need AR-15's to put you traitor fucks down.

 

[2aguy]

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?

When have you, in civilian life, ever had to fight for your life?

Perhaps you've been living in a fantasy world. Watching too many rambo movies.

Perhaps you're an advanced paranoid waiting for some boogey man to threaten you.

I'm a white middle-man who has lived and worked in some of the highest crime areas in the Untied States. I have NEVER felt the need for a weapon.

I suspect that the biggest challenge you have is finding the bottom of a beer can - which explains your paranoid delusions!

According to the CDC Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop criminals and save lives....don't like that number? The Department of Justice research showed the number to be 1.5 million....

I have never had a house fire, but we have fire insurance...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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?

No, it doesn’t.

But whatever its original intent doesn’t justify banning AR 15s.

That a law might be Constitutional doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a good law or its enactment is warranted.

 

[Uncensored2008]

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.

If efficient killing is your goal, a Ryder truck with fertilizer outdoes any firearm. What you of the left want is not to stop killings, but to stop resistance to your goals.

Your coup against Trump has failed, so now you'll wait until after the election, assuming he wins, you'll try to kill him. When you do that, this civil war you're waging against America becomes a hot war. You rightly fear the armed populace - you'd love to disarm us before you moved.

 

[Slade3200]

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

There are over 18 million AR-15 rifles in private hands in the United States...

In 2018 there were a total of 5 attacks with rifles, either AK-47 civilian models or AR-15s, which are civilian rifles.........

Total killed with rifles in mass public shootings.... 39 people.

numbers killed in the attacks...

4
11
4
3
17

Virginia Tech...2, 9mm pistols....32 killed.
Luby's Cafe... 2 pistols, 24 killed

Notice.....in only one of those attacks did the killer with the rifle kill more people than one of the guys with the pump action shotgun......

..the Russian shooter....Killed 20, injured 40 with a tube fed, 5 shot, pump action shotgun.

The Navy Yard shooter killed 12 with a pump action shotgun..

The Santa Fe shooter used a pump action shotgun and .38 revolver and killed 10

You don't know what you are talking about.

I asked for a straight forward and honest answer and you couldn’t help but spin it up. I just asked for a simple list of the major mass shootings over the past couple years... you skipped right over that... thanks for playing

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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?

Typical rightwing lies and demagoguery.

No one seeks to ‘take away’ anyone’s guns; no one seeks to ‘disarm’ citizens.

And no one seeks to deny citizens the ability to defend one’s property or life.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

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?

And I told you that you are failing at making about. When you build your point on a lie it leads to complete failure

You’re in no position to accuse others of lying when all you post are lies.

 

[Godboy]

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.

Many handguns hold 15-18 rounds. Handgun are much more mobile and concealable. The rounds they hold can be excessively deadly.

Yes, in some situations, but not as consistently as the AR. The AR's accuracy doesn't degrade any where near as quickly as any other commonly available gun, including pistols, and concealment isn't always an issue.

Yeah but bear with me for a second...practically speaking...if you are in close quarters (office, school...mosque...etc.) and wish to effect max damage...a handgun is just as effective a tool as an AR.
I mean there is a reason police carry handguns and not rifles. You have a valid point Bulldog not arguing just saying.

In practical situations one can maximize the kill ratio with a handgun on concealment and a greater element of surprise alone.

Is that why the military only issues handguns to our soldiers?

The military fights in open battlefiends, mostly. Rifles are not ideal in close quarters combat. Pistols and shotguns are far more dangerous indoors.

 

[2aguy]

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

There are over 18 million AR-15 rifles in private hands in the United States...

In 2018 there were a total of 5 attacks with rifles, either AK-47 civilian models or AR-15s, which are civilian rifles.........

Total killed with rifles in mass public shootings.... 39 people.

numbers killed in the attacks...

4
11
4
3
17

Virginia Tech...2, 9mm pistols....32 killed.
Luby's Cafe... 2 pistols, 24 killed

Notice.....in only one of those attacks did the killer with the rifle kill more people than one of the guys with the pump action shotgun......

..the Russian shooter....Killed 20, injured 40 with a tube fed, 5 shot, pump action shotgun.

The Navy Yard shooter killed 12 with a pump action shotgun..

The Santa Fe shooter used a pump action shotgun and .38 revolver and killed 10

You don't know what you are talking about.

I asked for a straight forward and honest answer and you couldn’t help but spin it up. I just asked for a simple list of the major mass shootings over the past couple years... you skipped right over that... thanks for playing

I gave you the shootings with rifles in 2018, then showed you worse kill rates with 5 shot, tube fed shotguns, and with pistols....it goes against what you are trying to lie about, so now you are all pissy.

 

[2aguy]

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?

Typical rightwing lies and demagoguery.

No one seeks to ‘take away’ anyone’s guns; no one seeks to ‘disarm’ citizens.

And no one seeks to deny citizens the ability to defend one’s property or life.

Moron, beto stated he supports door to door confiscation and not one democrat called him out...

 

[2aguy]

Many handguns hold 15-18 rounds. Handgun are much more mobile and concealable. The rounds they hold can be excessively deadly.

Yes, in some situations, but not as consistently as the AR. The AR's accuracy doesn't degrade any where near as quickly as any other commonly available gun, including pistols, and concealment isn't always an issue.

Yeah but bear with me for a second...practically speaking...if you are in close quarters (office, school...mosque...etc.) and wish to effect max damage...a handgun is just as effective a tool as an AR.
I mean there is a reason police carry handguns and not rifles. You have a valid point Bulldog not arguing just saying.

In practical situations one can maximize the kill ratio with a handgun on concealment and a greater element of surprise alone.

Is that why the military only issues handguns to our soldiers?

The military fights in open battlefiends, mostly. Rifles are not ideal in close quarters combat. Pistols and shotguns are far more dangerous indoors.

Yep.....the rifle is the weapon for long range shooting, but any gun works the same in close......so the mass public shooting ruse used by the anti-gunners is just another attempt to ban guns...

 

[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!!!!!!!!!!

.

This is truly childish, ignorant, and wrong.

“commiecrats” – you can’t be serious.

The problem is you and others on the right propagating ridiculous lies and demagoguery – such as the lie that anyone advocates for citizens to be ‘disarmed.’

History says other wise.

.

 

[OKTexas]

so libs want to ban an AR-15

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

~S~

Poor little commie, it's called the bill of rights, not the bill of needs. No one has to justify their personal choices to you or anyone else.

.

 

[OKTexas]

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?

Yet it was approved for civilian sale long before the military adopted an upgraded version for general use.

.

 

[2aguy]

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?

Yet it was approved for civilian sale long before the military adopted an upgraded version for general use.

.

Don't baffle him with facts.....the left wing head tends to explode if you do that....it gets messy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

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.

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?

And I told you that you are failing at making about. When you build your point on a lie it leads to complete failure

You’re in no position to accuse others of lying when all you post are lies.

Prove it liar.

 

[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?

Typical rightwing lies and demagoguery.

No one seeks to ‘take away’ anyone’s guns; no one seeks to ‘disarm’ citizens.

And no one seeks to deny citizens the ability to defend one’s property or life.

Liar

 

[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.

You're apparently a spoiled little child that does not know the difference between 'want' and 'need'.

So the solution is simple...if you have it because you 'can', the we will simply make sure that you 'can not'.

You can go back to sucking your thumb now.

More leftist delusions

Your way of conceding the argument, huh?

this guys a joke, can’t make one substantive point. Runs to the insult barrel instead. Who does he think he’s fooling?

You're a joke and a liar.
Irony when a clown calls someone else a joke