Explain this to me as if I am a 5 year old.

[fullmetaljesus]

I hate this damn argument.

One camp is: we are entitled to all weapons.

Another camp: we aren't entitled to ****

Another camp: only muskets

Another camp: some but not all.


Everyone is very loyal to their camp and would never change their mind regardless as to stats,facts, tends, whatever. So what's the ****ing point of arguing about it?

 

[jamil]

I hate this damn argument.

One camp is: we are entitled to all weapons.

Another camp: we aren't entitled to ****

Another camp: only muskets

Another camp: some but not all.


Everyone is very loyal to their camp and would never change their mind regardless as to stats,facts, tends, whatever. So what's the ****ing point of arguing about it?

What else is there to do on a rainy weekend?

 

[Bollorollo]

After reading thorough this guys (Yes I'm assuming his gender lol) posts he started with in a very short time I going with he probably wears a "Moms Demand" BS shirt and probably has been to the State Capital to oppose our freedoms of the 2nd Amendment. I'm even going to question if he owns a firearm plus he also has pronouns to go along with his name..
Oh yes! And almost forgot to say, He will be back with a new profile and post his anti 2nd views again in the near future..

 

[fullmetaljesus]

After reading thorough this guys (Yes I'm assuming his gender lol) posts he started with in a very short time I going with he probably wears a "Moms Demand" BS shirt and probably has been to the State Capital to oppose our freedoms of the 2nd Amendment. I'm even going to question if he owns a firearm plus he also has pronouns to go along with his name..
Oh yes! And almost forgot to say, He will be back with a new profile and post his anti 2nd views again in the near future..

He's certainly a kut above.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Ar-15s were never used in literally any war. The only time I have seen ar-15s used in any sort of war was in the Russian Ukrainian invasion. Before that there was not 1 single war were an Ar-15 was used therefore it’s simply not a “ weapon of war “

And by that definition, if they are going to now try to pull that in under the umbrella, a Toyota Hi Lux is a weapon of war.

 

[Sigblitz]

He will be back with a new profile and post his anti 2nd views again in the near future..

Pronouns are important to him, so he'll be using those.

 

[Creedmoor]

Ar-15s were never used in literally any war. The only time I have seen ar-15s used in any sort of war was in the Russian Ukrainian invasion. Before that there was not 1 single war were an Ar-15 was used therefore it’s simply not a “ weapon of war “

I believe in 1961, that a dozen or so were issued to soldiers with MacV Sog. The car15 rifles went to work where they were'nt supposed to be like Indochina.

 

[worddoer]

@mrmiller21 dont delete your thread starters.

I'll keep this simple. Someone please explain to me why civilians need to be allowed to own rifles that were designed for use in war. And why is it that banning assault rifles would be a "slippery slope" when banning fully automatic rifles is completely acceptable to gun owners? The reality is, we have always drawn lines at which civilians are limited by law with regard to which weapons they may own. Artillery pieces and mortars are also disallowed for home defense. You'd like my opinion? Oh, sure. I believe gun manufacturers and the billions spent to lobby and advertise...to reach people like you and me with alarmist nonsense is largely responsible for the rhetoric against controlling assault weapons. Gun companies have become quite wealthy selling AR platform rifles and other weapons of war. Is it because they are patriots? Ha. Yeah, that's it. They are worried about you defending your home against all those invaders that none of use have yet encountered. If any of my words here could possibly be construed as name-calling, I promise I have not used any such language. I look forward to a thoughtful discussion of this topic and reading the logical and honest posts by members here. If you would like to provide statistics, please include the sources, and it might be best to make the sources something other than "some guy's site on the interweb." Have a great day, fellow gun owners and citizens. I am a USAF veteran who owns a dozen or so firearms.

Sadly, there are a portion of gun owners (like the one above) that are willing to let others guns be taken away.....as long as they get to keep the guns they want. Cough...cough...those supporting the argument that 80% receivers, AR/AK pistols, bump stocks, pistol braces, and/or all forms of AR15's should be banned or forced onto the NFA.

Too many gun owners are selfish and practice the "you can take theirs, just don't take mine" philosophy. They hand over someone else's rights thinking they are protecting their own. Those who refuse to defend the freedom of others even if they don't use that freedom, those are self centered, narcissistic people.

They think that their bolt actions, lever actions, pump actions, and revolvers will be safe if others will give up their "scary guns". But once someone commits a high profile crime using one of those guns, the anti-gun crowd will demand those be banned too. Since you gave everything else up, why wouldn't you give those up too?

Lincoln said it best.....

"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves" Abraham Lincoln in letter to H.L. Pierce

As gun owners, we must learn to " all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall hang separately". - Benjamin Franklin

If someone is not willing to defend someone else's rights, then they don't deserve the rights they themselves have. Most soldiers who give their lives for this country do so with the knowledge that they were defending the rights of others.... rights they themselves may never use. Selling out the rights of others because you don't personally use that right is a self centered and narcissistic thing to do.

There appear to be even some here that don't see the inconsistency of supporting restrictions and obstacles to the practice of a natural right to the ownership of firearms (like the NFA) while rejecting any restrictions to other rights like freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Those same people would most likely be quite upset if they had to submit a report for government pre-approval and pay a $200 fee each time they would like to exercise their freedom of speech or their freedom of religion. Restrictions on freedom and liberty are wrong...all of them.

Many of these people don't even know how restricted our firearms freedoms have become in the last 100 years. Many, including myself, have learned this information and have had enough. We will no longer stand by and let our freedoms be further taken away. We will take every legal measure necessary to maintain and if at all possible regain our natural rights.

In 1934 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the National Firearms Act. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1938 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Federal Firearms Act. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1968 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Gun Control Act. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1986 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Firearms Owners Protection Act (protection by banning stuff???). But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1993 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1994 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (AKA assault weapons ban). Thankfully that was only in force from 1994-2004. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done and are still trying to reinstate it.

In 2019 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Bump Stock Ban. A ban that was not voted on by congress or in any legislation, but arbitrarily "written" into law by an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat, while offering no grandfathering option breaking the ex-post-facto laws. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 2022-2023 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." And the ATF banned pistol braces and 80% receivers. Again, a ban that was not voted on by congress or in any legislation, but arbitrarily "written" into law by an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat, while offering no grandfathering option breaking the ex-post-facto laws yet again. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

As you can see above, we have tried 8 times to compromise and it only came to us losing more rights while the other side gave nothing. The other side has worn that card out. There is no compromise that will ever be enough. They only continue to ask for more and more and more.

After losing a BIG chunk of our rights and trying this approach 8 different times, we as firearm owners have had enough. The anti-gun crowd has proven that they will never, never, never be satiated. And those who think that the anti-gun crowd will not ban NFA items the instant they have enough control are foolish. They have stated publicly many times they would LOVE to remove the NFA and ban all those items. How will that little $200 stamp save you when that happens?

The anti-gun crowd hunger, thirst and dream of gun control. And although they might be a minority of the population, the 2/3 of American's in the middle are apathetic enough they will not spend time, money, resources or clout to defend something that they themselves do not care about.

That is why many gun owners, including myself, believe that the time for compromise (including the NFA) is over. It is time to draw a line. Elections are not working, so we need to use the courts and any other peaceful legal mean others find to protect and hopefully regain our full rights back.

Letting others take our guns will lead to others taking your guns.

 

[deo62]

I was going to respond to the OP but I have neither the time nor the crayons

 

[MCgrease08]

Everyone is very loyal to their camp and would never change their mind regardless as to stats,facts, tends, whatever. So what's the ****ing point of arguing about it?

We'll, my camp has s'mores.

 

[jamil]

Sadly, there are a portion of gun owners (like the one above) that are willing to let others guns be taken away.....as long as they get to keep the guns they want. Cough...cough...those supporting the argument that 80% receivers, AR/AK pistols, bump stocks, pistol braces, and/or all forms of AR15's should be banned or forced onto the NFA.

Too many gun owners are selfish and practice the "you can take theirs, just don't take mine" philosophy. They hand over someone else's rights thinking they are protecting their own. Those who refuse to defend the freedom of others even if they don't use that freedom, those are self centered, narcissistic people.

They think that their bolt actions, lever actions, pump actions, and revolvers will be safe if others will give up their "scary guns". But once someone commits a high profile crime using one of those guns, the anti-gun crowd will demand those be banned too. Since you gave everything else up, why wouldn't you give those up too?

Lincoln said it best.....

"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves" Abraham Lincoln in letter to H.L. Pierce

As gun owners, we must learn to " all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall hang separately". - Benjamin Franklin

If someone is not willing to defend someone else's rights, then they don't deserve the rights they themselves have. Most soldiers who give their lives for this country do so with the knowledge that they were defending the rights of others.... rights they themselves may never use. Selling out the rights of others because you don't personally use that right is a self centered and narcissistic thing to do.

There appear to be even some here that don't see the inconsistency of supporting restrictions and obstacles to the practice of a natural right to the ownership of firearms (like the NFA) while rejecting any restrictions to other rights like freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Those same people would most likely be quite upset if they had to submit a report for government pre-approval and pay a $200 fee each time they would like to exercise their freedom of speech or their freedom of religion. Restrictions on freedom and liberty are wrong...all of them.

Many of these people don't even know how restricted our firearms freedoms have become in the last 100 years. Many, including myself, have learned this information and have had enough. We will no longer stand by and let our freedoms be further taken away. We will take every legal measure necessary to maintain and if at all possible regain our natural rights.

In 1934 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the National Firearms Act. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1938 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Federal Firearms Act. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1968 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Gun Control Act. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1986 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Firearms Owners Protection Act (protection by banning stuff???). But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1993 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 1994 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (AKA assault weapons ban). Thankfully that was only in force from 1994-2004. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done and are still trying to reinstate it.

In 2019 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." Then we got stuck with the Bump Stock Ban. A ban that was not voted on by congress or in any legislation, but arbitrarily "written" into law by an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat, while offering no grandfathering option breaking the ex-post-facto laws. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

In 2022-2023 people said "We pass this, and then we're done." And the ATF banned pistol braces and 80% receivers. Again, a ban that was not voted on by congress or in any legislation, but arbitrarily "written" into law by an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat, while offering no grandfathering option breaking the ex-post-facto laws yet again. But the anti-gun folk were NOT done.

As you can see above, we have tried 8 times to compromise and it only came to us losing more rights while the other side gave nothing. The other side has worn that card out. There is no compromise that will ever be enough. They only continue to ask for more and more and more.

After losing a BIG chunk of our rights and trying this approach 8 different times, we as firearm owners have had enough. The anti-gun crowd has proven that they will never, never, never be satiated. And those who think that the anti-gun crowd will not ban NFA items the instant they have enough control are foolish. They have stated publicly many times they would LOVE to remove the NFA and ban all those items. How will that little $200 stamp save you when that happens?

The anti-gun crowd hunger, thirst and dream of gun control. And although they might be a minority of the population, the 2/3 of American's in the middle are apathetic enough they will not spend time, money, resources or clout to defend something that they themselves do not care about.

That is why many gun owners, including myself, believe that the time for compromise (including the NFA) is over. It is time to draw a line. Elections are not working, so we need to use the courts and any other peaceful legal mean others find to protect and hopefully regain our full rights back.

Letting others take our guns will lead to others taking your guns.

I mean. TL;DR, but A+ for length!

 

[wcd]

We'll, my camp has s'mores.

Vacancies in your camp?

 

[fullmetaljesus]

We'll, my camp has s'mores.

Gross, you can stay in your camp.

I'm going to start my own camp with hookers and blackjack.

On second thought forget the camping.....and the blackjack.

 

[DeadeyeChrista'sdad]

Gross, you can stay in your camp.

I'm going to start my own camp with hookers and blackjack.

On second thought forget the camping.....and the blackjack.

Liquor? Rock n roll?

 

[Lpherr]

Liquor? Rock n roll?

Don't ever lick a hooker.

 

[DeadeyeChrista'sdad]

Don't ever lick a hooker.

Well, I already knew not to lick clowns, but don't really have any experience with hookers. I prefer to pay for my sex the old fashioned way.

 

[BugI02]

And by that definition, if they are going to now try to pull that in under the umbrella, a Toyota Hi Lux is a weapon of war.

Do they have a Bofors mount option or do you have to go after market?

 

[Rick Mason]

@mrmiller21 dont delete your thread starters.

rifles that were designed for use in war.

When you start your premise with so grievous of an error it invalidates everything that follows. Since you are so insistent upon factual information and documented sources I ask you to provide us with the list of militaries that are currently using or historically used the AR 15 style rifle in battle, and the list of wars where the firearm made a significant appearance. Be specific. Give detail.

 

[Ingomike]

When you start your premise with so grievous of an error it invalidates everything that follows. Since you are so insistent upon factual information and documented sources I ask you to provide us with the list of militaries that are currently using or historically used the AR 15 style rifle in battle, and the list of wars where the firearm made a significant appearance. Be specific. Give detail.

The poster you quoted was shootered if you did not know. Had a meltdown in another thread…

 

[OurDee]

5 year old, eh? Your question is framed with false assumptions. A man should be able to own any weapon the military takes into battle, period, because I say so. Because you are not the adult! Go to bed!