Fiji ST Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 The fact of the matter is, the 2nd Amendment CLEARLY states: 'The rights of of the people shall NOT be infringed' Regulations = infringment; and I have a problem with that. Again, it goes back to why the 2A was implemented in the first place. The founding fathers put it there so that The People would be just as well armed as the gov't should they need to rise up against tyranny. If you let the gov't legislate out all of your modern firearms, then how are you supposed to control the gov't should the time arise? Are you going to do it with a bolt action .22? Highly doubtful. The gov't knows that a WELL ARMED populous is harder to control. And the gov't doesn't like knowing that they're weaker than The People. A well armed person is a citizen A disarmed person is a subject I understand the whole 2nd Amendment and what it stands for. I'm all for it. I cannot stand having the government stepping in and tell a citizen what they can and cannot do. I am not for a ban on guns or anything, so don't think I am arguing against the gun lovers on here. I plan on being a gun owner later on in life myself as I've always shot with friends and family. What I want to know is why you or I would NEED (not want) to own an AR-15 or an AK-47. I want a real, justifible answer to why someone would own a gun of that magnitude when a handgun will suffice. My thought is, you can't really conceal it on you, and if you could, it would be a bit unwielding. It seems a bit much for home protection unless you are constantly having gurella soldiers attacking your house or something ridiculous like that. Maybe I'm wrong in my thoughts, maybe I'm right. I just want to hear a good, solid reasoning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flounder1647545522 Posted February 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I understand the whole 2nd Amendment and what it stands for. I'm all for it. I cannot stand having the government stepping in and tell a citizen what they can and cannot do. I am not for a ban on guns or anything, so don't think I am arguing against the gun lovers on here. I plan on being a gun owner later on in life myself as I've always shot with friends and family. What I want to know is why you or I would NEED (not want) to own an AR-15 or an AK-47. I want a real, justifible answer to why someone would own a gun of that magnitude when a handgun will suffice. My thought is, you can't really conceal it on you, and if you could, it would be a bit unwielding. It seems a bit much for home protection unless you are constantly having gurella soldiers attacking your house or something ridiculous like that. Maybe I'm wrong in my thoughts, maybe I'm right. I just want to hear a good, solid reasoning. AR's are used in competition shooting all the time on timed events. Also, 24 inch AR is a great varmit gun. There is your answer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I understand the whole 2nd Amendment and what it stands for. I'm all for it. I cannot stand having the government stepping in and tell a citizen what they can and cannot do. I am not for a ban on guns or anything, so don't think I am arguing against the gun lovers on here. I plan on being a gun owner later on in life myself as I've always shot with friends and family. What I want to know is why you or I would NEED (not want) to own an AR-15 or an AK-47. I want a real, justifible answer to why someone would own a gun of that magnitude when a handgun will suffice. My thought is, you can't really conceal it on you, and if you could, it would be a bit unwielding. It seems a bit much for home protection unless you are constantly having gurella soldiers attacking your house or something ridiculous like that. Maybe I'm wrong in my thoughts, maybe I'm right. I just want to hear a good, solid reasoning. The real question is, why should someone NOT BE ALLOWED TO OWN an AR-15 or an AK-47. What makes it more dangerous? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragknee66 Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 NEED (not want) to own an AR-15 or an AK-47. http://www.freewebs.com/njglazs/preparedness.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1veryfastvr4 Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 damn now they will go after my light saber once they do away with knives..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I understand the whole 2nd Amendment and what it stands for. I'm all for it. I cannot stand having the government stepping in and tell a citizen what they can and cannot do. I am not for a ban on guns or anything, so don't think I am arguing against the gun lovers on here. I plan on being a gun owner later on in life myself as I've always shot with friends and family. What I want to know is why you or I would NEED (not want) to own an AR-15 or an AK-47. I want a real, justifible answer to why someone would own a gun of that magnitude when a handgun will suffice. My thought is, you can't really conceal it on you, and if you could, it would be a bit unwielding. It seems a bit much for home protection unless you are constantly having gurella soldiers attacking your house or something ridiculous like that. Maybe I'm wrong in my thoughts, maybe I'm right. I just want to hear a good, solid reasoning. Shooting competitions use ARs all the time. Why do I need mine? For the off chance something happens. I will be prepared to stand up for what is right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1veryfastvr4 Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 What I want to know is why you or I would NEED (not want) to own an AR-15 or an AK-47. I want a real, justifible answer to why someone would own a gun of that magnitude when a handgun will suffice. . with that kinda of thinking you should never NEED to mod a car, never buy one more double cheesebuger than you NEED at mcD's, never drive any faster than speed limit cause you dont NEEd to right? never poke the old lady more than you NEED to? all these things are things you can do cause your an American right? cause you have that freedom....... im guessing if Gov't starts running our lives you wont have any liberties to do things you want to do...only things you NEED to do.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1veryfastvr4 Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I will be prepared to stand up for what is right. +1.... if that would ever come to that, which i highly doubt it ...all the nay sayers will be bitching cause they werent prepared.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 +1.... if that would ever come to that, which i highly doubt it ...all the nay sayers will be bitching cause they werent prepared.... ~10 years is my guess. If things continue to progress as they have (socially, economically, etc...) I think it will happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copperhead Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 Eric Holder is fucking psychotic, I think its safe to write him off as someone we can ignore. Fuck, he's the guy that said America is nothing but cowards due to race or some shit, what the hell is that all about? I bet he won't last long, unless he learns to control his mouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flounder1647545522 Posted February 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 (edited) What do you think is scarier, someone who owns an AR or the fact that with an average hunting rifle caliber, someone can hit a 12 inch disk at 1000 yards. (1000 yards is over 1/2 mile) Vid of me shooting out to 1K a few weeks back in case you dont believe me. The point is that both can kill but its the person behind it and not the weapon. We have shooters that can hit the mile target as well where I shoot. So the question is, what is too much and who has the right to make that decision. The correct answer.. Not the govt when it comes to firearms. They will start calling the average hunting rifles, sniper rifles when they want to try and ban them. Edited February 26, 2009 by flounder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiji ST Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 AR's are used in competition shooting all the time on timed events. Also, 24 inch AR is a great varmit gun. There is your answer I didn't know it was used for competitions. However, I don't think you need one to shoot racoons, but I guess that's your style. The real question is, why should someone NOT BE ALLOWED TO OWN an AR-15 or an AK-47. What makes it more dangerous? It's not about being allowed to own one or not. I just want to know why someone needed something with the power and capability. A gun is still a gun regardless, but an automatic rifle might be overkill for home protections, for example. http://www.freewebs.com/njglazs/preparedness.jpg I got a good chuckle out of that. Shooting competitions use ARs all the time. Why do I need mine? For the off chance something happens. I will be prepared to stand up for what is right. You expecting to participate in a coup d'etat? with that kinda of thinking you should never NEED to mod a car, never buy one more double cheesebuger than you NEED at mcD's, never drive any faster than speed limit cause you dont NEEd to right? never poke the old lady more than you NEED to? all these things are things you can do cause your an American right? cause you have that freedom....... im guessing if Gov't starts running our lives you wont have any liberties to do things you want to do...only things you NEED to do.... So you're saying that your NEED to own one is simply because you can? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flounder1647545522 Posted February 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I didn't know it was used for competitions. However, I don't think you need one to shoot racoons, but I guess that's your style. Its obvious that youre not a hunter and dont know much about rifles or hunting and thats ok. By varmit hunting I was referring to groundhog/prairy dog. There are also allot of people that use AR's to hunt ferrel pig as many states have a real problem with them. A few friends and I are trying to go on a pig hunt and probably a prairy dog hunt later this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 It's not about being allowed to own one or not. I just want to know why someone needed something with the power and capability. A gun is still a gun regardless, but an automatic rifle might be overkill for home protections, for example. Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Assault weapons ban has absolutely NOTHING to do with automatic weapons Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderboy Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I would agree that the chances of an uprising are slim to none in today's day and age. It's been said before, and I'd have to agree; this country has turned into a bunch of pussies. But, I would have to say that just because one doesn't think their side could win, that it's justifiable to just give up, and submit. Remember, the colonists had about an ice cube's chance in hell of winning as well... You're on a roll with this shit. +Rep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderboy Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I wouldn't say we as a nation are a bunch of pussies. We are way more complex than back in the day when the 2nd A was written and the population as a whole is more educated and aware. The founding fathers didn't have nearly the variables and issues to deal with as we do today. Thus it's not likely that the vary same point is going to apply in the same fashion thus new ways of dealing with these issues going to be put in place. Some will disagree with them. Times change as do people. Just because "x" product is out there doesn't mean there shouldn't be restrictions on who can own "x" You still have a right to bear arms and protect yourself. No one is taking that away. You are so wrong. This is a country of pussies, everyone wants everything sugar coated and politically correct. Fuck that. And by regulating the types of weapons you can own they are in a way, taking away your right to bear arms and protect yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderboy Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 Well, the time has come that we start making decision on facts and put some "good ideas" into play. if it's not a good idea, then fuck it, I don't need to be surrounded by a populace that has access to military weapons so they can in reality never use them in accordance with the "spirit" everyone is trying to defend. Not when someone with the IQ of a dog and a mullet can go get an assult rifle. IMO, they shouldn't be banned, but they should as hell need regulated and have restrictions added to them. If everyone has a right, that's fine, go buy a pistol or a rifle or shotgun. Want an assult weapon or however you want to define some of these guns, then make them pass through a series of qualifications that will determine if they can have them. Personally, no one "needs" them. 99.9% of those arguing against any regulation simply just "want" them because they have a right to do so. People also "want" children to abuse and not care for while I flip the bill and dogs they let run lose and can train to fight too. No thanks, there are very likely better solutions to put in place some 218 years later. You're right, and the behavior of the citizens of this country still sucks and all you have to do is look around at the irresponsibility in this country and see that until we can fix dumb fucks who can't manage money, raise and care for children properly or obey some of the basic fucking laws, we sure as hell shouldn't be allowing them to own assault rifles. Some, but certainly not everyone...thus some qualifications need to be put in place. fair enough, then once again, let's come up with a set of qualifications that will insure these weapons are in hands of only people who are qualified, understand their use and the consequences of said use and ownership. Your theory is pretty flawed. You seem to understand that this is a right of the people. Which means that there should be no need to prove anything to anyone to have them. Period. If it were done your way, it would be a "privilege" to own weapons and no longer a right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 This country is full of pussies because of guns. I'm sticking to my claymore from this day on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copperhead Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 but an automatic rifle might be overkill for home protections, for example. I dunno, you may have some rich friends, but I don't personally know a single person that owns an automatic firearm. And yes, I own an AR. No, it's not automatic. Now then, its commonly accepted that the few people that are pushing the hardest for bans (the brady bunch) will stop at nothing less than banning all SEMI auto firearms, that accept a detachable magazine. Under that provision we would be banning.....the 10/22. Good job getting the most dangerous gun EVAR....out of the bottom of our closets? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 (edited) You are so wrong. This is a country of pussies, everyone wants everything sugar coated and politically correct. Fuck that. And by regulating the types of weapons you can own they are in a way, taking away your right to bear arms and protect yourself. I don't need more than my Glock, .357 and my shotgun to protect myself nor do I believe for a minute I personally ever will. If you do, then worrying about owning a gun is the last thing you need to worry about. Begin fixing the problem you fear will make the aforementioned a reality and fix the real issue at hand. The problem with this country isn't that it's filled with Pussies, it's filled with people who don't address the real issues that lead to concerns like this coming up in the first place. They cut off their nose to spite their face and then blame everyone else for taking away or limiting what they can do yet when it comes right down to life, they themselves aren't doing shit that would make a difference. Your theory is pretty flawed. You seem to understand that this is a right of the people. Which means that there should be no need to prove anything to anyone to have them. Period. If it were done your way, it would be a "privilege" to own weapons and no longer a right. It's not flawed...I just don't feel every dumb ass with two teeth and the IQ of a dog should have the ability to legally own certain types of weapons. There's nothing flawed about requiring a level of responsibility and intelligence to own something such as an AR or AK. Fucking rights of the ignorant are what costs the rest of us in the end and that shit needs to stop. It's not political correctness that's fucked up, it's our giving the ignorant and irresponsible privileges simply because they have a heartbeat and live in the USA. How about we make them have a fucking IQ and a proven sense of responsibility. I never said they wouldn't have the right to own any gun, but certain ones, yes, I do favor qualifications to own one. We no longer live in the 1700's and there are by far more ignorant dumb asses around than back then. I don't need to arm them with much more than a revolver. Not until they can prove they will use it with responsilbity, intelligence and in accordance to how they are to be used..either sport or hunting or whatever other reason someone wants to try and use to justify them. If they want to go "hunting" with one or use it for "competition" then that's fine. Wrap some guidelines and requirements around it and make them qualify to own those particular weapons for those uses. If they don't like that, ship their ass over the middle east and have them play all day with real weapons and real targets and learn in the field. If they make it through military training then God Bless them, they have earned the right to own a bigger gun than me. Otherwise, Darell, Darell and their other brother Darell can shut the fuck up and go to school and add something to society. Edited February 26, 2009 by TTQ B4U Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 You expecting to participate in a coup d'etat? No. I'm expecting to have to defend the very principles this country was formed one. Edit: I will do the above with whatever weapon is necessary. That weapon could be a pen, voice, rifle, etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderboy Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 No. I'm expecting to have to defend the very principles this country was formed one. Edit: I will do the above with whatever weapon is necessary. That weapon could be a pen, voice, rifle, etc... This is the first time I have ever agreed with you. Look, plain and simple. This is america and it may sound ignorant but, we should be able to have things just because we WANT them. If you dont like it you should live somewhere more "civilized". The country was founded on the principles of having the freedom to do pretty much any god damn thing you want (as long as it doesnt poorly affect others), and thats how it should stay. End of story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 This is the first time I have ever agreed with you. Look, plain and simple. This is america and it may sound ignorant but, we should be able to have things just because we WANT them. If you dont like it you should live somewhere more "civilized". The country was founded on the principles of having the freedom to do pretty much any god damn thing you want (as long as it doesnt poorly affect others), and thats how it should stay. End of story. Not everything I say is an insult, sometimes I say serious things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaTS1200 Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Fucking rights of the ignorant are what costs the rest of us in the end and that shit needs to stop. It's not political correctness that's fucked up, it's our giving the ignorant and irresponsible privileges simply because they have a heartbeat and live in the USA. How about we make them have a fucking IQ and a proven sense of responsibility. I agree completely with statement above. I just think you're making these "assault weapons" out to be more lethal than they really are. A semi-auto .223 in my opinion is not much more of a force than your Glock with a high capacity mag. Anyone who looks at a black rifle automatically thinks that it's a weapon of mass destruction because it's clad with black plastic and looks menacing. If you looked at essentially the same weapon at a Wal-Mart store and it had a Walnut stock and a low capacity mag. you probably wouldn't think anything of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Look, plain and simple. This is america and it may sound ignorant but, we should be able to have things just because we WANT them. If you dont like it you should live somewhere more "civilized". The country was founded on the principles of having the freedom to do pretty much any god damn thing you want (as long as it doesnt poorly affect others), and thats how it should stay. End of story. I'm sorry but if you have to preface something with saying "this may sound ignorant".........I'll leave that alone. Look, I'm not saying ban guns or particular guns, I'm no expert on assault weapons or guns and don't need to be nor care to be. What I am saying is that these more advanced guns do not belong in the hands of just anyone. The weak, ignorant, poor, uneducated, irresponsible do not "need" these guns and I think we'll all agree, the complete opposite of them aren't necessarily the ones our public officials are concerned with. These guns are getting into the hands of the wrong people by some means and that's not typically a responsible, educated person who is simply using it to hunt or participate in sports. Or maybe it is and they are simply skirting the laws or perhaps working within the guidelines of them as they stand today. I don't know. But something is going on that needs to stop in order to save lives and keep these guns from falling into the wrong hands. Change is needed. That said, I agree with the previous quotes that it's the behavior of the people that is under scrutiny and yet the powers that be are going after the hardware. That's because it's easier to stop a static object in distribution vs changing behavior of the people. Now, if the responsible gun owners have concerns with what's happening, let's here what they suggest. I asked this on page one and have yet to hear anything other than CR's constitutional experts spout off about what they have the right to do. Instead, let's hear your solutions to the problem that all this is stemming from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.