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.
A gun can server several purposes. If you don't want any of those purposes filled, don't buy a gun.
They get so hung up on what the object is designed, or intended to do. The bottom line is that rifles are designed, and built to put a projectile on target. What the human does with that it up to him/her. It can be a multitude of things, target shooting, competition, hunting, self defense, etc.
The fact that many people don't know an AR-15 is used A LOT for hunting tells me they know absolutely nothing about the rifle, or shooting sports in general. They are ignorant.
I know this question makes a lot of people uncomfortable, but nonetheless I think it's worth asking. In the wake of yet another rampage perpetrated by a deranged lunatic with an (assault) rifle, the question is going to be asked and one way or another the gun issue is going to be addressed. Let me preface this by saying I'm not a liberal anti-gun nut who ****s myself at the sight of a gun, but rather a gun owner and an ardent gun rights advocate. I abhor despotic Democrat-run states like New York and New Jersey that de facto prohibit all but the rich and politically connected from owning and carrying firearms. I abhor "gun-free zones" like schools, hospitals, and universities where occupants are disarmed and forced to be victims of an armed intruder. I think everyone who isn't deranged or a criminal should be allowed access to small arms without having to beg for permission and/or pay a ransom to the state. An armed society makes for a polite society. That statement has been proven time and again. Despite what the psychos from New York and California will tell you, most people are less likely to engage in anti-social behavior when they have to back up said behavior with their life.
That being said, as a rational thinking human being I also abhor the idea of a deranged lunatic going on a killing spree with an assault rifle. The system is supposed to keep criminals and mental ill from accessing deadly weapons, yet the very system has failed time and again. Spree killings are not only getting more and more frequent, but also more and more deadly. The first one I'm old enough to remember, that sent the nation into collective shock was Columbine, and sadly if that happened today it wouldn't even register as so many more deadly spree killings have taken place since. I've heard all of the arguments in favor or rifles and have made some of them in the past to the anti-gun left, but the more I think about the topic, the more specious the pro-rifle arguments appear to me.
First of all, the AR-15 is in neither a hunting rifle nor sporting rifle, it's an assault rifle. It was developed for the military for the purpose of cover fire. The variant sold to civilians is semi-automatic, while the models used by the military are select-fire. That's the only difference, otherwise they're one and the same. An AR-15 makes a poor choice for a hunting rifle and even worse for self-defense. If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night, you're going to shoot them with an AR-15? Do you not realize that even if you aim the rifle accurately the bullet has so much force that it will exit your target, go through a wall and kill one of your family members? The best weapon for home and self-defense is a pistol with hollow point ammo. You think you're going to use your rifle to fend off a government siege? Please, the government has enough manpower and firepower to wipe you off the face of the earth and every record that you ever existed. It's insane to think that you can fight the government with a rifle. Like I said before, the system can't seem to keep these weapons out of the hands of deranged people, so maybe it's time to take them off the market. I understand that they're fun to own and to operate, and I enjoy target shooting as much as the next person, but if we can't keep them out of the hands of crazy people, then perhaps we have the duty to get rid of them for the common good. Thoughts?
Should have sent this note to the Alamo. could have been written by Sanata ana. Give up, you are outgunned and out manned.
Like the number of sharks swimming offshore amongst swimmers without their knowledge, shark attacks are rare considering close the contact.
Considering that firearms are out there in far greater nubers than anyone can discover in a poll, the shootings are very rare except for the very predictable gang murders which occur in well know areas, repeatedly, often by the same person and are a constant where firearms restrictions are the greatest. Tallying gangland mass murders into the 'mass murder' tally is creative statistics, a well suited companion for the fantasmagorical use of the words, 'assault weapon', in anti gun tirades.
An 'assault weapon' is a literary term weaponized by the antigun activists to hopefully cover 'all rifles' and most shotguns. You can be arrested under law, in some states, if your rifle has a bayonet lug or a flash guard.
You don't need a 500 horsepower cadilac, a vette that can do 200 mph or more than one shot of burbon. Considering that 10k people die each year in alcohol related auto accidents and scores more physicall maimed for life....the part that always escapes the cited 10k death toll. Killed and maimned exceeding 20k a year is acceptable.
A AR is not an assault weapon as defined in some states. It does not have bayonet lug or the other 4 features that legally define an assault weapon...where it has been defined.
My concern always has been the lack of distinction..or inclusion of some characteristiics between defined AWs and leagl guns. Someone will declare that the legal guns fit the description in some lawyerly word game way.
The largest portion of murders occur in predictable locations by the predictable people and yet no effective action is taken as in chicago. chicago is a lesson in the futility of gun laws. the innocent obey them and the killers ignore them. We have laws prohibiting murder. Problem solved...No? then why try to pass more gun laws if we see that laws are ineffective in dealing with the problem. Only in theory do gun laws work and only to a point of diminishing return.
It is especially frustrating when laws on the books are ignored abused by activist judges and publicity seeking prosecutors who get a win by having a perp plead down from a felony. The justice system has perverted the law for their own purposes. If the laws were followed the latest perp might not have been able to carry out his unspeakable behavior. Still questionable.
How about CA dem senator Yee, a staunch antigun activists who sold rocket launchers and fully automatic wepons to anyone with cash. Where is the media following that to conclusion. What crimes have been traced back to Yee? where does a state senator get such weapons? How many weapons of war has this guy sold????
Instead the media without discretion or self control, reveals every excruciating detail of the latest shooting, giving weapon, caliber, strategy, a how to video for the next wack job waiting to come out of his basement. Like it or not the difference between yesterday and today is the instant communication. the media must still report, but with discretion, knowing a lurker is studying their broadcast.
In days of old a pervert or insane person hid themselves away and figured they were the only one so afflicted, now every perversion you can't even imagine has a forum to exchange ideas to validate any deviant mental issue.
most of all we have the collusion between the dems hate and fear mongering campaign and the media. they have created an environment hat draws out the violent and pre validates their violence. The dems have hired thugs to cause vilolence at trump rallys and then blame trump. the dems have embraced the furgeson lie to give rise to the terroristgroup BLM and the resultant murder of cops.
Putin is smiling, his work to see..... exchanging jokes with iran and NK mocking the gullibility and usefulness of the socialist democrats and their propaganda machine. Every gun off the street emboldens our enemies be they foreign or domestic.
ARs are the least of our problems.
To suggest banning ARs as the solution, is to ensure the complexity of the poroblem is ignored and death toll rise.
Last edited by Kracer; 11-09-2017 at 05:49 AM..
Reason: sp
Since you responded to practically everyone but me, I am reposting (#23) my response in case you missed it;
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1
You need to educate yourself on this issue rather than acept the liberal medias terms and thought process. Heck watch this video to see that the evil black gun is not really as "bad" as many other types of firearms;
Who gets to decide which gun/s are not allowed, and which ones are?
More importantly, if you accept we have constitutional rights to firearms to protect ourselves from enemies foreign and domestic (including a tyrannical government run amok), then regular citizens should have access to the most sophisticated firearms.
I find it perplexing how many of our God given rights articulated in our Constitution are under assault, from freedom of speech/thought, to assemble, to bear arms, to be free of searches/seizures, etc.
It is almost like there is a coordinated effort to eviscerate our constitutional republic, all in the name of safety or not hurting anyone's feelings.
As a very wise man once said, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedZin
What are the stats on people with AR-15s protecting their property by shooting invaders vs. people with AR15s shooting unarmed people minding their own business, I wonder?
I suspect stats are very slim as most cases of defensive use are not even called into the police, much less is there a category for it on most police incident reports.
That is even more true about the specific type of gun used for defensive purposes.
So just brandishing a gun to thwart a crime happens every day, but is rarely reported to police. If you doubt this occurs, you are fooling yourself.
Additionally defensive gun use that requires a police report does occur (i.e. potential rapist shot), but the news media rarely reports on it. But if you read the link below, you will see the NRA reports on it monthly from the few local papers that it does make the news in;
What they have stats on, are the number of so called "assault weapons" used in crimes. These incidents (or more accurately, lack thereof) of them being used in crimes was infinitesimal, thus the Clinton era ban was not renewed, because it was a solution/law without a problem.
Like it or not (and despite the rare mass shooting), the AR platform is not the problem. We see time and time again that lax mental health availability and institutions to house the mental ill are lacking. Additionally reporting of those issues is fought by many of the same people who actually oppose guns in the first place. Supposedly under the guise of not stigmatizing the mentally ill or unstable.
Spree killings are not only getting more and more frequent, but also more and more deadly.
And chances are they will continue to get more frequent as republicans cut funding for mental health programs in exchange for supply side tax cuts for wealthy Americans.
First of all, the AR-15 is in neither a hunting rifle nor sporting rifle, it's an assault rifle. It was developed for the military for the purpose of cover fire. The variant sold to civilians is semi-automatic, while the models used by the military are select-fire. That's the only difference, otherwise they're one and the same. An AR-15 makes a poor choice for a hunting rifle and even worse for self-defense. If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night, you're going to shoot them with an AR-15? Do you not realize that even if you aim the rifle accurately the bullet has so much force that it will exit your target, go through a wall and kill one of your family members? The best weapon for home and self-defense is a pistol with hollow point ammo. You think you're going to use your rifle to fend off a government siege? Please, the government has enough manpower and firepower to wipe you off the face of the earth and every record that you ever existed. It's insane to think that you can fight the government with a rifle. Like I said before, the system can't seem to keep these weapons out of the hands of deranged people, so maybe it's time to take them off the market. I understand that they're fun to own and to operate, and I enjoy target shooting as much as the next person, but if we can't keep them out of the hands of crazy people, then perhaps we have the duty to get rid of them for the common good. Thoughts?
Most mass murderers use assault weapons (basically because of the way they look.)
When you see a shotgun you think of shooting a bird, when you see a small caliber rifle you think of shooting small game, when you see a large caliber rifle you think of shooting big game, and when you see a assault weapon you think of killing large numbers of people.
But its almost pointless to talk to any republican about banning assault weapons for civilian use (they won't even pass laws to stop the mentally ill and terrorists from buying guns.)
And the corporate republican politicians have their gullible base believing they are protecting gun rights, but every time a mass murder happens states pass more and more local gun laws. And because republicans refuse to pass any common sense gun law on the federal level one day we will have states with European-like gun laws (but republicans could care less.)
it is not an assault rifle - but just like I can't get a bazooka, you don't need a AR15 either -- just like I can't have a military out HUMVEE- you do not need a TANK!
it is not an assault rifle - but just like I can't get a bazooka, you don't need a AR15 either -- just like I can't have a military out HUMVEE- you do not need a TANK!
Stop telling me what I need, or don't need. You sound like a controlling, elitist, government TOOL. I have news for you. Private individuals own Humvees, tanks, and artillery pieces, and it is completely legal.
Stop telling me what I need, or don't need. You sound like a controlling, elitist, government TOOL. I have news for you. Private individuals own Humvees, tanks, and artillery pieces, and it is completely legal.
Oh I'm sure- I know of people having some 300 weapons in their trailer- legal to have them-- but what he need it for?
did not mean to bold the comment- but there is the problem of want or need here
I know this question makes a lot of people uncomfortable, but nonetheless I think it's worth asking. In the wake of yet another rampage perpetrated by a deranged lunatic with an (assault) rifle, the question is going to be asked and one way or another the gun issue is going to be addressed. Let me preface this by saying I'm not a liberal anti-gun nut who ****s myself at the sight of a gun, but rather a gun owner and an ardent gun rights advocate. I abhor despotic Democrat-run states like New York and New Jersey that de facto prohibit all but the rich and politically connected from owning and carrying firearms. I abhor "gun-free zones" like schools, hospitals, and universities where occupants are disarmed and forced to be victims of an armed intruder. I think everyone who isn't deranged or a criminal should be allowed access to small arms without having to beg for permission and/or pay a ransom to the state. An armed society makes for a polite society. That statement has been proven time and again. Despite what the psychos from New York and California will tell you, most people are less likely to engage in anti-social behavior when they have to back up said behavior with their life.
That being said, as a rational thinking human being I also abhor the idea of a deranged lunatic going on a killing spree with an assault rifle. The system is supposed to keep criminals and mental ill from accessing deadly weapons, yet the very system has failed time and again. Spree killings are not only getting more and more frequent, but also more and more deadly. The first one I'm old enough to remember, that sent the nation into collective shock was Columbine, and sadly if that happened today it wouldn't even register as so many more deadly spree killings have taken place since. I've heard all of the arguments in favor or rifles and have made some of them in the past to the anti-gun left, but the more I think about the topic, the more specious the pro-rifle arguments appear to me.
First of all, the AR-15 is in neither a hunting rifle nor sporting rifle, it's an assault rifle. It was developed for the military for the purpose of cover fire. The variant sold to civilians is semi-automatic, while the models used by the military are select-fire. That's the only difference, otherwise they're one and the same. An AR-15 makes a poor choice for a hunting rifle and even worse for self-defense. If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night, you're going to shoot them with an AR-15? Do you not realize that even if you aim the rifle accurately the bullet has so much force that it will exit your target, go through a wall and kill one of your family members? The best weapon for home and self-defense is a pistol with hollow point ammo. You think you're going to use your rifle to fend off a government siege? Please, the government has enough manpower and firepower to wipe you off the face of the earth and every record that you ever existed. It's insane to think that you can fight the government with a rifle. Like I said before, the system can't seem to keep these weapons out of the hands of deranged people, so maybe it's time to take them off the market. I understand that they're fun to own and to operate, and I enjoy target shooting as much as the next person, but if we can't keep them out of the hands of crazy people, then perhaps we have the duty to get rid of them for the common good. Thoughts?
I'd say you don't know much about semi auto long guns if you don't think they make good hunting rifles. The 15 in 6.8 or 6.5 is a perfect medium game rifle.
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.
