Another Gun Thread

[CDF47]

Just curious, do you own an AR-15 or AR-10?  I just bought my first AR-15 last month.  It's a Colt LE6920.  I love it.  It shoots great.  It's my new favorite gun to shoot.  I like to shoot as a hobby of mine.  One of my favorite ones along with ice fishing and fishing.

Thanks for showing everyone here you selfish attitude. It doesn't even bother you that the inventor of the Ar-15 never intended it for civilian use.

It is a battlefield weapon, not a toy. "My favorite" is not how you talk about a deadly tool. 

"My favorite" is how you talk about music, art, sports."

"I like to shoot as a hobby of mine".....

^^^^^^^ Hobby is not the same as a need, like NOT DYING. Not dying is not a hobby. Not dying is a need.

You can also target shoot with other firearms. So what you are describing by using the word "hobby" isn't describing a right, but a like. 

I get that you might like shooting an Ar-15, but you don't need one, especially if you are going to call it a "hobby".

A long time ago, I got pissed at my mom for buying me a cheaper Ross bicycle when the other kids on my street had the popular BMX bikes with mag rims. Her attitude was, "You got a bike, you don't need a BMX". She was right. 

If you want a firearm to "have fun" with and shoot targets with, you still do not need an Ar-15. Huge difference between a want and a need.

---

If you like shooting things at a rapid pace for fun, paintball can do the same thing without the ability to kill lots of people in short order.

The founders of this great country gave us the right to bear arms primarily to combat tyranny at home as I have stated (in addition to defending against potential invaders and for self defense against thugs and criminals).  Even Jesus told two of His disciples to buy swords for self defense.  We need weapons close to what the military has to defend the country as a line of defense at home and to deter or take out a tyrannical government.  Hitler took the guns from dissidents.  Paintball guns don't work against dictators.  Sorry.

---

Well, I have a favourite sword, a favourite axe, and a favourite chisel.  Is that ok, or should I call them something else?

Boru

Not the same. I had my "favorite" WW2 fighter plane at one time. But it isn't legal for civilians to use a fully armed Corsair in public.

He isn't treating that the same when he talks about it. He is delusional in that he does not understand it is not a toy. I am sure you can find cops and military that have "favorite weapons" too. But the ones who understand impact and use, of and seriousness of it, also know the meaning of time place and context and treat those deadly objects tools. They also understand that not everyone should use them.

You cant take a sword or axe or chisel 32 stories up in a hotel and murder 50plus people in minutes.

---

Spray weapons are not designed for "fun", rapid fire spray weapons are designed to cause quick damage to more people in a quicker period.

A spray weapon.  Where did that term come from?  The weapon we are discussing is semi-automatic like many other semi-automatic guns on the market.  The mass murderer in Las Vegas was using a bump stock which is now illegal for nearly all US citizens.  The bump stock made the gun shoot more like an automatic assault rifle rather than a single shot semi-automatic assault weapon.  

I understand it is not a toy.  I started shooting firearms 27 years ago when I was 13 years old.  Gun safety is always stressed in all videos, discussions,....  There are four rules of gun safety.  Do you know what they are?  Many gun owners know them because they are commonly discussed and included in manuals, videos, discussions,...  Maybe some initial gun safety training is needed for first time gun owners.  I could see a 1 hour class or something along those lines but we are keeping the ARs and the AKs.

---

Not the same. I had my "favorite" WW2 fighter plane at one time. But it isn't legal for civilians to use a fully armed Corsair in public.

He isn't treating that the same when he talks about it. He is delusional in that he does not understand it is not a toy. I am sure you can find cops and military that have "favorite weapons" too. But the ones who understand impact and use, of and seriousness of it, also know the meaning of time place and context and treat those deadly objects tools. They also understand that not everyone should use them.

You cant take a sword or axe or chisel 32 stories up in a hotel and murder 50plus people in minutes.

---

Spray weapons are not designed for "fun", rapid fire spray weapons are designed to cause quick damage to more people in a quicker period.

Well, my sword, axe and chisel are all deadly tools.  But why can't a civilian who likes guns describe one as a 'favourite'?  If it shoots well, functions properly, and so forth, it can be their favourite.  It just means the one they like the most.

Don't be so uptight.

Boru

Thanks Boru!

---

I have a favorite Browning M2 .50 cal. Heavy Machine Gun. Fully automatic, licensed and legal.

Gawszillia, we are not talking about one person, and I am not talking about you. You know that. In a perfect world if everyone thought like you, we would not have the problems we do, or the amount of firearm violence we do.

I am talking about long term policy and long term collective attitude about firearms, not any one person.

You know I suffer from anxiety and depression, but unlike other firearm owners, you accept that it would not be a good idea for me to own a firearm. Unfortunately our laws don't vet at time of sale to prevent someone with my mental illness from getting one.

And as far as big rounds, and high capacity clips and rapid fire spray weapons, again, we are not talking about a perfect world where everyone thinks like you. 

It just seems more pragmatic to limit clip sizes, ban battle field weapons, and vet at the time of sale rather than wait till something bad happens.

Using mental illness is a way to disarm the public or to keep the public away from getting needed psychiatric and psychological help.  If it came down to it I would never mention that I get anxiety again.  Everyone gets anxiety and depression.  That is a way to disarm Americans which would prevent many people from even bothering to get help.

A 30 round magazine is not that high capacity.  There are semi-automatic pistols that can hold a lot of rounds. 

There is already a vetting at time of sale.  Felons cannot own guns.  Mentally ill cannot carry guns,...

---

I've rarely disagreed with you.

On this subject I always see that. And appreciate it.

There is a huge difference between a firearm worshiper and a firearm owner. You are an owner, not a worshiper.

I do not worship firearms.  I worship God alone.  Firearms are needed for many reasons as I point out above and they just happen to be my hobby as well.

[Amarok]

The founders of this great country gave us the right to bear arms primarily to combat tyranny at home as I have stated

They were idiots and no they aren't 

(in addition to defending against potential invaders and for self defense against thugs and criminals).

There are better ways 

  Even Jesus told two of His disciples to buy swords for self defense. 

Then Jesus was a bigger hypocrite 

We need weapons close to what the military has to defend the country as a line of defense at home and to deter or take out a tyrannical government. 

Hitler took the guns from dissidents. 

Argument ad hiterum and Hitler loosened gun laws and didn't take the guns till after he took over tus killing your whole point .

Paintball guns don't work against dictators.  Sorry.

Neither do real ones but they sure as hell put a lot of them in power

---

I understand it is not a toy.  I started shooting firearms 27 years ago when I was 13 years old.  Gun safety is always stressed in all videos, discussions,....  There are four rules of gun safety.  Do you know what they are?  Many gun owners know them because they are commonly discussed and included in manuals, videos, discussions,...  Maybe some initial gun safety training is needed for first time gun owners.  I could see a 1 hour class or something along those lines but we are keeping the ARs and the AKs.

And most don't care

---

Using mental illness is a way to disarm the public or to keep the public away from getting needed psychiatric and psychological help. 

That makes no sense 

If it came down to it I would never mention that I get anxiety again.  Everyone gets anxiety and depression.  That is a way to disarm Americans which would prevent many people from even bothering to get help.

No it wouldn't 

There is already a vetting at time of sale.  Felons cannot own guns.  Mentally ill cannot carry guns,...

And yet they do

---

I do not worship firearms.  I worship God alone. 

Nope fetishize guns

Firearms are needed for many reasons

Their not needed for any reason 

as I point out above and they just happen to be my hobby as well.

Gun nut

[Gawdzilla Sama]

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?col...recNum=732

https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?co...recNum=888

[CDF47]

The founders of this great country gave us the right to bear arms primarily to combat tyranny at home as I have stated

They were idiots and no they aren't 

(in addition to defending against potential invaders and for self defense against thugs and criminals).

There are better ways 

  Even Jesus told two of His disciples to buy swords for self defense. 

Then Jesus was a bigger hypocrite 

We need weapons close to what the military has to defend the country as a line of defense at home and to deter or take out a tyrannical government. 

Hitler took the guns from dissidents. 

Argument ad hiterum and Hitler loosened gun laws and didn't take the guns till after he took over tus killing your whole point .

Paintball guns don't work against dictators.  Sorry.

Neither do real ones but they sure as hell put a lot of them in power

---

I understand it is not a toy.  I started shooting firearms 27 years ago when I was 13 years old.  Gun safety is always stressed in all videos, discussions,....  There are four rules of gun safety.  Do you know what they are?  Many gun owners know them because they are commonly discussed and included in manuals, videos, discussions,...  Maybe some initial gun safety training is needed for first time gun owners.  I could see a 1 hour class or something along those lines but we are keeping the ARs and the AKs.

And most don't care

---

Using mental illness is a way to disarm the public or to keep the public away from getting needed psychiatric and psychological help. 

That makes no sense 

If it came down to it I would never mention that I get anxiety again.  Everyone gets anxiety and depression.  That is a way to disarm Americans which would prevent many people from even bothering to get help.

No it wouldn't 

There is already a vetting at time of sale.  Felons cannot own guns.  Mentally ill cannot carry guns,...

And yet they do

---

I do not worship firearms.  I worship God alone. 

Nope fetishize guns

Firearms are needed for many reasons

Their not needed for any reason 

as I point out above and they just happen to be my hobby as well.

Gun nut

Disagree on all and Hitler took the guns from dissidents prior to having them murdered.

[The Grand Nudger]

-and he let his buddies keep them, confident in the knowledge that they would use them against dissidents. He loosened the regs for them. This hitler thing is complete and utter nonsense, educate yourself.

We do something similar here, our gun policies seem to be microtargeted, lol. Even as the party of guns seeks to loosen restrictions for loyalists, it strengthens prohibitions for people that just so happen to be dissidents from their point of view. Ultimately asserting that if The Wrong People™ try to use them, The Right People™ will knock them down with bigger and better guns.

Our as our president so succinctly put it, his guys have all the guns, so things could get very bad for the other guys if they don't shut their face and know their place. Did jesus cosign on that when he told two idiots to buy big knives?

[Brian37]

It is a MYTH that Hitler outlawed firearms. HE DID NOT, Hitler only took them from non loyalists. He expanded firearm rights to loyalists. So if the right wing is so afraid of tyranny then they would have to do the same and ban ownership by democrats. The 2nd amendment has no religious or party loyalty oath in it. That means even democrats can own firearms. If the right wing is so worried about liberal tyranny, then they would literally have to ban democrats from owning firearms and only allow republicans to own them. If anyone wants that, then that means they would want to do what Hitler did and consolidate power to a fascist one party state and only allow loyalists to own firearms.

If not, then they need to GROW THE FUCK UP, and accept that voting is also a right, and not getting everything you want 100% of the time is not tyranny.

[onlinebiker]

And you still want to ban " banana clips" right Brian?

[The Grand Nudger]

I think that what a competent gun advocate could tell you, is that it is tyranny when you could both get 100% of what you want, and there are better ways to get it, but by force of authority one side gets the shaft and the other doesn't (or can't) effect the purported beneficial consequence.

Banning sporting rifles and their accessories won't effect the intended outcome, and we know this, if for nothing else (and theres plenty else), on account of how we're not even discussing banning the guns and accessories that actually do contribute a statistically meaningful portion of gun violence.  

Fact, mass shooters overwhelmingly prefer pistols, as all gun violence/crime overwhelming trends toward pistols, as all gun death and gun injury overwhelmingly trends towards pistols. So....lets...ban the black rifle and it's magazines? Mind, I'm not arguing against targeted bans and greater restrictions, I'm tacitly accepting them and that they work (which is itself questionable) -in principle-... and then asking whether the things so popular in gun control advocacy will succeed on their own merits by their own metrics? I think gun control advocates need to stop arguing with the nuts and start making the case -for- their own proposals. They might find that it's harder to do that than they think, and obviously harder than it is to roll around in shit with the gunswine, lol.

[Brian37]

I think that what a competent gun advocate could tell you, is that it is tyranny when you could both get 100% of what you want, and there are better ways to get it, but by force of authority one side gets the shaft and the other doesn't (or can't) effect the purported beneficial consequence.

Banning sporting rifles and their accessories won't effect the intended outcome, and we know this, if for nothing else (and theres plenty else), on account of how we're not even discussing banning the guns and accessories that actually do contribute a statistically meaningful portion of gun violence.  

Fact, mass shooters overwhelmingly prefer pistols, as all gun violence/crime overwhelming trends toward pistols, as all gun death and gun injury overwhelmingly trends towards pistols.  So....lets...ban the black rifle and it's magazines?  Mind, I'm not arguing against targeted bans and greater restrictions, I'm tacitly accepting them and that they work (which is itself questionable) -in principle-... and then asking whether the things so popular in gun control advocacy will succeed on their own merits by their own metrics?  I think gun control advocates need to stop arguing with the nuts and start making the case -for- their own proposals.  They might find that it's harder to do that than they think, and obviously harder than it is to roll around in shit with the gunswine, lol.  

I have already said in this thread, that it does not matter to me if it is a long rifle or handgun. An uzi cannot be considered a long gun. A handgun with a high capacity clip has more bullets in it, just like a high capacity clip for a long gun. Nobody needs high capacity clips or rapid fire anything.

The totality of firearm deaths are due to the fact that the makers do not give a shit about where they end up and our vetting sucks  at time of sale. Mass shootings are extremely high in America as compared to our first world allies. But even given that, the majority of deaths are from suicides, second domestic violence, third accidental. Most injuries and deaths happen with the user or someone the user is familiar with.

And it is "gun safety" not "gun control". I hate that term "gun control", because the worshipers think it is a call on our part to a one party fascist state. 

And why should we have to argue shit? We've been held hostage by the industry and their profit lobbies. If the "sell more and do nothing" worked, we'd have little to no firearm violence. But we are top of the list. They should be explaining why they think their tactics work when it is clear they do not work.

40 years of firearm violence on daily basis is not my idea of a good plan. We need to do things differently and what we have now SUCKS!

[onlinebiker]

I think that what a competent gun advocate could tell you, is that it is tyranny when you could both get 100% of what you want, and there are better ways to get it, but by force of authority one side gets the shaft and the other doesn't (or can't) effect the purported beneficial consequence.

Banning sporting rifles and their accessories won't effect the intended outcome, and we know this, if for nothing else (and theres plenty else), on account of how we're not even discussing banning the guns and accessories that actually do contribute a statistically meaningful portion of gun violence.  

Fact, mass shooters overwhelmingly prefer pistols, as all gun violence/crime overwhelming trends toward pistols, as all gun death and gun injury overwhelmingly trends towards pistols.  So....lets...ban the black rifle and it's magazines?  Mind, I'm not arguing against targeted bans and greater restrictions, I'm tacitly accepting them and that they work (which is itself questionable) -in principle-... and then asking whether the things so popular in gun control advocacy will succeed on their own merits by their own metrics?  I think gun control advocates need to stop arguing with the nuts and start making the case -for- their own proposals.  They might find that it's harder to do that than they think, and obviously harder than it is to roll around in shit with the gunswine, lol.  

I have already said in this thread, that it does not matter to me if it is a long rifle or handgun. An uzi cannot be considered a long gun. A handgun with a high capacity clip has more bullets in it, just like a high capacity clip for a long gun. Nobody needs high capacity clips or rapid fire anything.

The totality of firearm deaths are due to the fact that the makers do not give a shit about where they end up and our vetting sucks  at time of sale. Mass shootings are extremely high in America as compared to our first world allies. But even given that, the majority of deaths are from suicides, second domestic violence, third accidental. Most injuries and deaths happen with the user or someone the user is familiar with.

And it is "gun safety" not "gun control". I hate that term "gun control", because the worshipers think it is a call on our part to a one party fascist state. 

And why should we have to argue shit? We've been held hostage by the industry and their profit lobbies. If the "sell more and do nothing" worked, we'd have little to no firearm violence. But we are top of the list. They should be explaining why they think their tactics work when it is clear they do not work.

40 years of firearm violence on daily basis is not my idea of a good plan. We need to do things differently and what we have now SUCKS!

And you still provide no proof whatsoever that banning " high capacity" magazines will accomplish anything.

The only " data" you present is your ill formed opinion.