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.
I'm also the wife and the gun enthusiast in our house. Although my hubby DOES own both a hand gun and a rifle.
We have always been the real FIRST RESPONDERS when it comes to self protection and we should remain ever vigilant to ensure that our rights are never taken away!!
when seconds count, the cops are minutes away, or in my case, 40 minutes away.
way too long to depend on cops to save the day. more than likely when a crime of that nature happens, the cops will arrive in time to survey and start a murder case.
What, precisely, is it about the AR-15 (which wasn't even USED in this shooting) that "shouldn't be in the hands of civilians"?
You're a smart guy and we usually agree on most things, so I'm hoping there is a good answer lurking behind your post.
There are many facets of the AR-15 a deadly weapon, that is why the design is similar to the M16 in just about every respect, ease of use, lethal force of rounds, light weight, lack of recoil, magazine size except lack of full auto. I understand many weapons can come close to or meet those criteria, but if some can't at least concede that this doesn't belong on the market then everything belongs on the market.
Recently some of the designers of the AR-15 indicated the same, Eugene Stoners family and Jim Sullivan, why does a civilian need a military style weapon for home defense.
Thank you for clarifying. I knew I wasn't crazy when people kept saying that a .22 and .223 bullets were almost the same size. I was thinking that the bullet means the entire cartridge and not the projectile part of the cartridge! D'oh!
There are many facets of the AR-15 a deadly weapon, that is why the design is similar to the M16 in just about every respect, ease of use, lethal force of rounds, light weight, lack of recoil, magazine size except lack of full auto. I understand many weapons can come close to or meet those criteria, but if some can't at least concede that this doesn't belong on the market then everything belongs on the market.
Recently some of the designers of the AR-15 indicated the same, Eugene Stoners family and Jim Sullivan, why does a civilian need a military style weapon for home defense.
if civilians never bought any type of military firearm, and military style firearms were only designed by the government, then the USA would still be shooting a musket.
There are many facets of the AR-15 a deadly weapon, that is why the design is similar to the M16 in just about every respect, ease of use, lethal force of rounds, light weight, lack of recoil, magazine size except lack of full auto. I understand many weapons can come close to or meet those criteria, but if some can't at least concede that this doesn't belong on the market then everything belongs on the market.
Recently some of the designers of the AR-15 indicated the same, Eugene Stoners family and Jim Sullivan, why does a civilian need a military style weapon for home defense.
"Need" is a poor metric, I think we both understand that.
As for those other criteria, I'm willing to listen, but if you use number of rounds, weight, lack of recoil, etc. as your metric, it will include A LOT more that just what most people consider "an assault rifle".
To simply say that a semi-automatic rifle, capable of holding 30 rds, that is relatively light, of a certain caliber is OK for civilians to own is a FAR cry from saying that "everything belongs on the market". Anyone who is being unemotional can recognize that.
"Need" is a poor metric, I think we both understand that.
As for those other criteria, I'm willing to listen, but if you use number of rounds, weight, lack of recoil, etc. as your metric, it will include A LOT more that just what most people consider "an assault rifle".
To simply say that a semi-automatic rifle, capable of holding 30 rds, that is relatively light, of a certain caliber is OK for civilians to own is a FAR cry from saying that "everything belongs on the market". Anyone who is being unemotional can recognize that.
I am unemotional about it and I believe all firearms should on the market for all law abiding citizens to buy, all without any government intervention at all.
I am unemotional about it and I believe all firearms should on the market for all law abiding citizens to buy, all without any government intervention at all.
Which, I assume, is not the same as advocating for anyone and everyone to be able to buy an RPG, or an Abrams, a suitcase nuke or an Apache helicopter. Correct?
Get an alarm system if you already don't have one.
We have two dogs now. Pretty close to the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
There are many facets of the AR-15 a deadly weapon, that is why the design is similar to the M16 in just about every respect, ease of use, lethal force of rounds, light weight, lack of recoil, magazine size except lack of full auto. I understand many weapons can come close to or meet those criteria, but if some can't at least concede that this doesn't belong on the market then everything belongs on the market.
Recently some of the designers of the AR-15 indicated the same, Eugene Stoners family and Jim Sullivan, why does a civilian need a military style weapon for home defense.
That's why I said in my post that if the argument by anti-gun people is that civilians can't have the AR, then they need to quit playing coy and admit that they won't be happy until all guns are gone.
Stoner's family can say what they 'think' he would say, but he's dead. And Sullivan issued a statement after that HBO interview. He says they misrepresented him - that he didn't think civilians would get to have the AR, NOT that he was opposed to them having it.
Which, I assume, is not the same as advocating for anyone and everyone to be able to buy an RPG, or an Abrams, a suitcase nuke or an Apache helicopter. Correct?
There are many facets of the AR-15 a deadly weapon, that is why the design is similar to the M16 in just about every respect, ease of use, lethal force of rounds, light weight, lack of recoil, magazine size except lack of full auto. I understand many weapons can come close to or meet those criteria, but if some can't at least concede that this doesn't belong on the market then everything belongs on the market.
Recently some of the designers of the AR-15 indicated the same, Eugene Stoners family and Jim Sullivan, why does a civilian need a military style weapon for home defense.
Military style?
Like looks military?
Then no one should be allowed to wear camouflage, either. Looks too military. And all that lethal sneaking up ability. *shudder*
Force?
You are aware that you're not allowed to use the .223 to hunt in some places bc it isn't powerful enough, right?
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.
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.
