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.
You sir, are what we call a FUDD. An AR-15 with STANDARD capacity magazine holds thirty rounds. When multiple armed assailants kick down my front door in order to do harm to me, and my family, I am glad I have one. It may not even the odds, but it is better than a six round revolver. The AR-15 is also an excellent target, and HUNTING rifle. Many use them for hunting all kinds of game from varmints to deer. The AR-15 is modular, and uppers in various calibers, that are great for hunting can be had.
Rapid fire weapons? Do you mean semi auto firearms that have been around for over 100 years?
He's no gun owner. He's just trying to give himself some credibility on the subject of guns. He's one of those "I'm not looking to take away anyone's guns as long as they don't take away mine". As if he has any at all. So you see he has nothing to lose.
He's no gun owner. He's just trying to give himself some credibility on the subject of guns. He's one of those "I'm not looking to take away anyone's guns as long as they don't take away mine". As if he has any at all. So you see he has nothing to lose.
These are the same liberal/progressives that blame "society" for the actions of violent criminals, and want to let them off because "it's not their fault". So instead of enforcing existing gun laws, these perps plea it down to little, or no jail time. Rinse and repeat, they are back on the street committing violent crimes.
Your chances of dying from arterial sclerosis are far more likely that someone kicking down your door while you sit in the dark with your AR15. In fact your chances of dying from any number of things - like a car wreck - are far, far higher yet we keep hearing about how your military knock-off weapon is needed to protect you from some imaginary BLM supporter, local gang member or UN Solider.
It's really none of your business why anyone owns a gun or what type for any lawful purpose whatsoever. Who the hell are you anyway? Who appointed you as arbiter of what people should be allowed to own or why?
How many more times does the media have to sensationalize these events and provoke tensions?
Ever think the national coverage of these events with inflammatory language to play everyone by their emotions has something to do with it?
How does one ‘sensationalize’ an event where an angry white male enters a church full of families, shouts “everybody die **********” and kills over 20 innocent people, including babies?
Nobody needs to ‘sensationalize’ that. Just reporting it is horrifying enough.
These are the same liberal/progressives that blame "society" for the actions of violent criminals, and want to let them off because "it's not their fault". So instead of enforcing existing gun laws, these perps plea it down to little, or no jail time. Rinse and repeat, they are back on the street committing violent crimes.
This Sutherland shooter is a good example. They are now saying that his name should have been entered into the federal database as a prohibited possessor. The hell with that. He should have been incarcerated for the rest of his life that way he could never get a hold of not only a gun but any other object or substance of which he could do great harm. After all this monster not only beat his wife but fractured his infant son's skull.
These are the types of people that are allowed to freely roam the streets. Yet they can't understand why people would want to own guns. Like I've said often in my posts it's not about public safety at all. It's about controlling and enslaving those who do not subscribe to their way of thinking. Which is why they want to abolish the 2nd Amendment in the first place or at the very least render it all but obsolete. In other word's you shall only be allowed a single shot musket that must be kept under lock and key at all times. With the exception of written permission from some bureaucrat to take it out hunting or to target shoot.
Some have even suggested that we should be allowed to own a firearm only if it is locked up at an armory and can only be used under the strict supervision of a range officer.
How does one ‘sensationalize’ an event where an angry white male enters a church full of families, shouts “everybody die **********†and kills over 20 innocent people, including babies?
Nobody needs to ‘sensationalize’ that. Just reporting it is horrifying enough.
Very easy, by covering it 24/7 for weeks on end. Indeed: "Just reporting it is horrifying enough".
In the not too distant past we didn't have the internet and a 24 hour news cycle and we didn't have all these events as often either. After the Gun Control Act of 1968 things got progressively worse regarding mass shootings. Before that and other than JFK's assassination they were rare indeed.
You do realize the main purpose of the 2nd was to prevent tyranny from gaining a foot hold, how can the people ever successfully remove a Govt from power when its people do not have access to adequate enough weapons to complete the job?
Its like the twilight zone, so many people who actually side with Govt taking more and more gun rights away from the people, they have allowed themselves to be duped and brainwashed by this tyrannical Govt and its right hand man, the media!
Should I not be able to protect myself, and family from armed intruders in a home invasion scenario? What would I do if I did not have a firearm? How about if I was car jacked? I attended a sentencing of a criminal many years ago in which a friend of mine was the prosecutor. The perpetrator held up a young couple at gun point in their car. He shot the husband, and kidnapped the woman. He raped her multiple times, and was going to then murder her as well, but she was able to miraculously escape to safety. The perp was tried, and convicted. If that couple had access to a gun, the man may still be alive, and the woman maybe unharmed. As they were defenseless the worst type of HELL happened to both of them.
The entire crime you described would never have taken place had the criminal in question not had easy access to guns. This is the self defeating paradox of gun ownership, if you have ready access to guns, then criminals have ready access to guns.
In countries where there are no guns, criminals don't use guns because they cannot get a hold of them. Look at the UK, Australia, NZ, Germany, Denmark, France, Japan, Singapore, etc
Very easy, by covering it 24/7 for weeks on end. Indeed: "Just reporting it is horrifying enough".
In the not too distant past we didn't have the internet and a 24 hour news cycle and we didn't have all these events as often either. After the Gun Control Act of 1968 things got progressively worse regarding mass shootings. Before that and other than JFK's assassination they were rare indeed.
GCA 1968 was a travesty, and should be repealed. Another feel good law that does nothing but harm law abiding citizens. Sporting purpose my *ss.
Yes, gun are a problem, and our weak control is a problem "We need Improved Gun Control"... I'm a gun owner, and want to keep my gun!!! but I also know that I have no need within the American System of Society nor "within" the American Landscape of this Nation to need an "Assault Styled Weapon". There just is no logical need for it. !!!
It is not good for hunting nor is it respectful to the Animals being hunted. We don't need to set up Military Defense at our homes, as we have a National Military, a Federal Law Force, A State Law Force, A Country Law Force, and a City Law Force.
Shot Guns can hold 6 shells,
the standard magazine of a semi auto pistol is 6 and can be 9 rounds.
A long gun with a magazine of 6 rounds
There is nothing we need a rapid fire weapons, beyond the scope of these hunting and home protection levels, we simply don't have a base need for it, and certainly we as citizens do not something that can spew out 10's and 100's of rounds a minute.
We simply need to make sure our Political system functions and we have enough controls in place that no man, or men can orchestrate a military styled take over of the nation under some autocratic or dictatorial agenda and premise. Therefore, we need to make sure... that No individual President or any high ranking official to institute any level of any kind of Martial Law without Congressional Approval... with votes from Both Parties... and considering the gamesmanship played to force feed a man on our Supreme Court... then we up the vote count necessary to 90 or even 100, or 120... what ever is the number to assure the people of Peace and no usurping our Governance System takes place. and that mandates that members of "both parties must support any choice to engage in any factions of Martial Law, and the Constitution cannot be arbitrarily suspended. "....
These the people can cease with the rhetoric about.. their guns as being a guard against insurrection of our government against its people.
After reading many of your posts, I generally ignore the blocks and blocks of nonsense texts, as just so much white noise. But, wow, this one contains so much misinformation, lies and just horrible philosophy, that I couldn't let it pass without saying so. I see several other posters thought the same.
How you fit this much misinformation in a post that doesn't reach your usual ten page essay length is suprising.
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.
