Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But you have to realize it looks foolish to argue against guns and specifically ar15s when you don't realize there isn't anything unique about an ar15 and that all bullets inflict severe trauma on soft tissue. Its not just an ar15 issue.
The point I'm making is people who don't know about guns assume the ar15 is some death Ray. Comparatively speaking there are far deadlier guns out there.
The most common caliber AR15 bullet is a .223 / 5.56mm.
The smallest most common caliber in the world is .22LR. .22lr is the best small game (think squirrel or rabbit) gun or target practice, shooting introduction gun in the world
The actual bullet diameter from a .22lr to re ar15s .223 is .003. Like the size of a hair.
.
And what matters even more is the projectiles aka bullets that are available that are much more deadly than the ones he apparently shot.
I'd hazard that the Flechette Sabot shotgun shells are more damaging to flesh/organs than a .223...
Now THAT is something being made that makes me wonder why...
It never ceases to amaze me how humans are so damned good at designing things to eliminate (kill,maim,destroy) each other and yet have such a hard time coming up with ways to STOP doing it to each other.
It can most certainly can be taken away. Will it? Not likely.
Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress;
Never by Congress but even if it was it would still have to be ratified by the States as stated above. That is highly unlikely...
The coastal democrats are going to end up getting so caught up in banning guns that they forget that there are voters in the middle of America. Then they will end up nominating a presidential candidate in 2020 that wins NY and CA handily but gets trounced in the electoral college by Trump, again. As a moderate that is mostly embarrassed by Trump, this makes me sick since I can see it coming miles away.
A gun banning amendment will never pass a 3/4 majority when the first day of deer season is considered a holiday in most rural counties across the nation.
VITAL TO DISARM
=\=\=\=\=\=\=
You can never have an efficient totalitarian police state, when it has to be “benevolent” and fearful of millions of armed citizens. And you can’t disarm millions of armed citizens when they won’t tell you where the arms are. And you can’t arrest them until you criminalize their disobedience to “reasonable” gun restrictions and “common sense” registration. And you can’t tolerate their belief that they have an “endowed right” to self defense against tyranny, that supersedes your political power of the bigger gun.
• An Armed Populace Fears No Government.
• A Disarmed Populace Fears All Government.
Of course, this wouldn't be a problem if folks were aware of the Creator endowed rights to life and therefore the right to defend that life.
People who have rights do not need government permission (license).
People who have no rights need permission.
Do you know how and when you surrendered your endowed rights?
Never by Congress but even if it was it would still have to be ratified by the States as stated above. That is highly unlikely...
It's important to remember, that even if all that happened, and it was repealed, it only means that there is no longer a constitutional 'right' of ownership. That is still a far cry from all guns being explicitly banned.
People can still own guns in Australia, Germany, etc, but there are way more restrictions on the specific type of gun and who can own them.
-except for slavery, lets's amend it and fix that
-also, black people should be able to vote, let's amend it and fix that
-oh, and women need to vote too, let's amend it and fix that
-people really seem to like their alcohol, let's repeal that amendment and fix that
-4th term president? Not a good idea, let's amend it and fix that
Exactly. The Constitution has been amended many times for very good reasons and the 2nd amendment is not set in stone. When people corrupt a "right" to infringe on the right of people to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then it is legitimate to regulate that right. Even our 1st amendment right to freedom of speech has various regulations surrounding it.
This citizen is flabbergasted at how easy it is to buy an AR-15 in his home state.
No, guy in vid didn't buy gun. We will never know if he even could pass background check
Everybody points at this video, and ignores that Rich A Rosendahl didn't actually complete the paperwork, didn't buy an AR-15. He says "could've most likely easily walked out of there..." but didn't follow through, just ran out to his car and freaked out.
Exactly. The Constitution has been amended many times for very good reasons and the 2nd amendment is not set in stone. When people corrupt a "right" to infringe on the right of people to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then it is legitimate to regulate that right. Even our 1st amendment right to freedom of speech has various regulations surrounding it.
I think, in furtherance of the 1st Amendment right of freedom of speech, that anyone who participates in an internet forum should have to undergo a background check as well as possibly a course of training.
But you have to realize it looks foolish to argue against guns and specifically ar15s when you don't realize there isn't anything unique about an ar15 and that all bullets inflict severe trauma on soft tissue. Its not just an ar15 issue.
The point I'm making is people who don't know about guns assume the ar15 is some death Ray. Comparatively speaking there are far deadlier guns out there.
The most common caliber AR15 bullet is a .223 / 5.56mm.
The smallest most common caliber in the world is .22LR. .22lr is the best small game (think squirrel or rabbit) gun or target practice, shooting introduction gun in the world
The actual bullet diameter from a .22lr to re ar15s .223 is .003. Like the size of a hair.
.
I’m not missing the point, you are.
For one, I’m not arguing against guns. I’m not making any type of argument like that here at all. But if I were to make an argument like that, I would argue for more regulations to try to ensure that guns, at least certain guns, cannot legally fall into the hands of certain people. I’m also not trying to make certain guns look unique. I was talking specifically about the Parkland shooting.
Two, yet again you’re getting hung up on ridiculous technicalities as an attempted distraction. MY point is that NO ONE CARES about any technicalities when 17 kids just died last week, again, in school, in 6 minutes. When 60 died at a concert months ago. When 20 6 year olds died 5 years ago. The important discussion is not whether the weapons used were semiautomatic or automatic or the technicalities of the bullets used. It’s simply that people, kids, are dying far too often in places they shouldn’t be, after doing nothing wrong, at the hands of the types of people who should not be allowed to have such weapons in the first place given their obvious instability. THAT is the important part of the discussion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.