Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which bucket do you fall into?
I own or at least have shot an AR and I don't want them banned 96 47.52%
I own or at least have shot an AR and I do want them banned 17 8.42%
I've never owned / shot an AR and I don't want them banned 53 26.24%
I've never owned / shot an AR and I do want them banned 36 17.82%
Voters: 202. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:46 PM
 
46,307 posts, read 27,108,503 times
Reputation: 11130

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
No one answered the question why they need this gun.
Was that the question of this thread?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:49 PM
 
25,447 posts, read 9,809,749 times
Reputation: 15338
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord View Post
As a purely experimental exercise that will rely on the honor system, I'd like to poll the audience here and test my theory.

My hypothesis is that the people who want AR-15s banned are those that are ignorant of them, and probably of firearms in general...but obviously I could be wrong.

Soooooo many people think they are some type of "super gun" that has more power than "other guns" and can shoot faster, leap tall buildings, etc. etc. etc.

Just a quick background: in reality they were born out of the soldiers in the USA's armed forced not be able to shoot and /or carry ACTUAL big, powerful guns very well.

The idea was to create very handy, lightweight, low recoiling firearm that would be easy to carry and easy for even the smaller men and the women in the military to shoot well.

The old M1 Garand, 03 Springfield, etc. were ACTUALLY powerful guns (30-06 cartridge and they were HEAVY). The 223 Remington that the standard AR uses is a pip-squeak comparatively, but it has adequate power for short-range situations, and almost everyone can shoot it better BECAUSE IT'S WEAKER. Less recoil, weight, blast, etc.

SO WITH THAT SAID

Try to be honest and let us know which one of these buckets you fall into in order to test my theory.
All I know is that the majority of school shootings and other mass shootings have been carried out with these types of weapons. That's pretty much all I need to know. A dear friend of mine lost her partner to an assault weapon. Couldn't even recognize her. Who on God's earth needs to kill something deader than dead?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:50 PM
 
19,724 posts, read 10,128,243 times
Reputation: 13091
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
All I know is that the majority of school shootings and other mass shootings have been carried out with these types of weapons. That's pretty much all I need to know. A dear friend of mine lost her partner to an assault weapon. Couldn't even recognize her. Who on God's earth needs to kill something deader than dead?
Actually, most mass shootings are done with handguns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:52 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,315 posts, read 26,217,746 times
Reputation: 15647
Quote:
Originally Posted by TamaraSavannah View Post
For one thing, we don't trust them to stop at banning just this gun. We know that they will come back, again and again, wanting more. As the phrase goes, "Enough is enough" and we are done compromising.

Of course, it is a Bill of Rights......not a Bill of Needs. Hence, such a question has no grounds to be answered.

If I was a hunter, I would want this gun for I have read enough accounts where an unprepared hunter goes off running after game, gets lost, and it is only through luck that he doesn't starve to death. With this gun, one can carry plenty of ammo to be able to fire distress rounds (one round a minute for 3 rounds) and hunt secondary game. Further, should said hunter go off and injure an arm, just as falling down a gully, it will be a lot easier to load a ready magazine instead of trying to load rounds in, one by one.

This rifle can be in a tool bag, disassemble, until it is needed but if it is needed, it can be operational in under a minute.

The technology for this gun is 55 to 115 years old.....if not further. Why should the populace be held back in firearm technology?

Why should the populace be punished for the crimes of others?

Finally, in the interest of preventing tyranny of government, there are certain tactical reasons to this gun.....reasons I am not willing to discuss on an open forum. For in the words of Napoleon, "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.".
Why should civilians need a weapon like this, I understand it's novelty but it is also deadly and a favorite in mass shootings. I'm not a hunter but I'm sure there are other options, beside it has a spiraling round, small entry wound, enormous exit as it was designed for military use and very similar to the M16.

Yes it's over 60 years old but the public shouldn't have this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:53 PM
 
25,447 posts, read 9,809,749 times
Reputation: 15338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist View Post
Actually, most mass shootings are done with handguns.
Well, then we'll just go with school shootings. That's still enough for me. No civilian needs a gun that makes it so you have to be identified by your DNA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:54 PM
 
19,724 posts, read 10,128,243 times
Reputation: 13091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Why should civilians need a weapon like this, I understand it's novelty but it is also deadly and a favorite in mass shootings. I'm not a hunter but I'm sure there are other options, beside it has a spiraling round, small entry wound, enormous exit as it was designed for military use and very similar to the M16.

Yes it's over 60 years old but the public shouldn't have this.
Then the police should not have it either if it is that dangerous. And most mass shootings are done with handguns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:56 PM
 
19,724 posts, read 10,128,243 times
Reputation: 13091
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
Well, then we'll just go with school shootings. That's still enough for me. No civilian needs a gun that makes it so you have to be identified by your DNA.
Well the only reason they need the DNA is because he shot them numerous times in the head. Same would be true with almost any gun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:57 PM
 
46,307 posts, read 27,108,503 times
Reputation: 11130
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
My question remains - how many AR platforms are out there chambered in something other than .223 as compared to every AR platform in private hands?

Yes, I can get an AR in .50 BMG or .308, or .30-06, etc, but how many actually do? Of those, how many actually hunt with those rifles?
Damn hooligan, how many other conditions do you want to add to your initial respone to make youself right?
Do you want rimfire option or ALL centerfire options?

The larger platforms have become far more likeable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:58 PM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,461 posts, read 7,092,496 times
Reputation: 11707
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
No one answered the question why they need this gun.

It's not called "The Bill of Needs".

I don't own one but I can think of several reasons why someone would.

It's the perfect home defense weapon.

Light, low recoil, good magazine capacity, easy to mount a tactical light on.

There is no "one size fits all" gun for everyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2022, 03:58 PM
 
Location: Texas Hill Country
23,652 posts, read 13,998,393 times
Reputation: 18861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Why should civilians need a weapon like this, I understand it's novelty but it is also deadly and a favorite in mass shootings. I'm not a hunter but I'm sure there are other options, beside it has a spiraling round, small entry wound, enormous exit as it was designed for military use and very similar to the M16.

Yes it's over 60 years old but the public shouldn't have this.
Remember, the founding fathers did not just get back from a hunting trip but liberating a country.

Civilians need a weapon like this to keep the government from turning to tyranny and even if that is a battle we cannot win, we can at least make their victory very expensive for them.

Oh, and by the way? All rifle rounds spiral, that's what the groves in the barrel are for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:03 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top