RE: Just another gun thread, don't bother reading.
March 2, 2015 at 10:05 am
(This post was last modified: March 2, 2015 at 10:11 am by The Grand Nudger.)
AR's...lol, nah? I'll ban em because I don't mind banning a skin kit clone of every other rifle in existence if we get to keep every other rifle in existence. Folks think an AR15 is an assualt rifle (and so do many of the people who buy them)...they think that these "assault rifles" are a credible threat to our society. That they are not assault rifles, nor are AR15s a blip on the gun crime radar is irrelevant - they look scary as shit, being painted black and all. The anti gun nuts can ban AR15's all day long if I get to keep the rest of my mechanically identical but for some reason not as frightening rifles. Banning any specific brand of a chambering is not infringing upon my right to bear arms- it infringes upon the business interests of Colt and Armalite who wish to sell me a chambering in their distinctive style.
If I can't use Colt or Armalites .22 or .270 -as AR15-...then fine....I'll buy a Ruger 10/22 or a Rem 800/Savage Axis in .270. There is no chambering for the AR15, by any manufacturer, that is unique to the paint and rails that make an AR15 an AR15. It's a toy gun and as a negotiating piece it has value that far outweighs what it actually is or what banning or controlling them would entail. Gov can do a buyback, and what would it matter? Hell, you could could buy 2 or 3 rifles in the same chambering (and objectively better rifles - too) for the buyback price of a single AR15.
@Losty
Any revolution or civil war is more likely to be a loss if those are the metrics. I understand, and from that frame I agree, but the number of deaths - again- tilts the scales towards insurgency. All an insurgency has to do to win is not be annihilated, thats it. Just about anything a conventional force could do is something it would not like to do, or would play more easily into the hands of insurgency. An armed public with a grievance is, at this point, impossible to govern without consent in even small areas of the world. When we talk about the US government crushing some domestic insurgency the scale and scope of the battlefield is just too much. We can't win that fight because, frankly, we wouldn't want to...and we do hear that expressed alot, but usually the other way round "The american public is too lazy/dumb/ill equipped for armed rebellion". None of that is true, and a sober appraisal of our military's history and capabilities might lead us to the conclusion that even dumb, lazy americans with shotguns could accidentally cause enough casualties (don't we already?) to make any conventional force flinch given the limited range of acceptable strategies to suppress that group.
If I can't use Colt or Armalites .22 or .270 -as AR15-...then fine....I'll buy a Ruger 10/22 or a Rem 800/Savage Axis in .270. There is no chambering for the AR15, by any manufacturer, that is unique to the paint and rails that make an AR15 an AR15. It's a toy gun and as a negotiating piece it has value that far outweighs what it actually is or what banning or controlling them would entail. Gov can do a buyback, and what would it matter? Hell, you could could buy 2 or 3 rifles in the same chambering (and objectively better rifles - too) for the buyback price of a single AR15.
@Losty
Any revolution or civil war is more likely to be a loss if those are the metrics. I understand, and from that frame I agree, but the number of deaths - again- tilts the scales towards insurgency. All an insurgency has to do to win is not be annihilated, thats it. Just about anything a conventional force could do is something it would not like to do, or would play more easily into the hands of insurgency. An armed public with a grievance is, at this point, impossible to govern without consent in even small areas of the world. When we talk about the US government crushing some domestic insurgency the scale and scope of the battlefield is just too much. We can't win that fight because, frankly, we wouldn't want to...and we do hear that expressed alot, but usually the other way round "The american public is too lazy/dumb/ill equipped for armed rebellion". None of that is true, and a sober appraisal of our military's history and capabilities might lead us to the conclusion that even dumb, lazy americans with shotguns could accidentally cause enough casualties (don't we already?) to make any conventional force flinch given the limited range of acceptable strategies to suppress that group.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
