PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
yah, I mean dude, its so lame to compare constitutional rights with constitutional rights......doncha know?.....
An honest question on assault rifles.
- Thread starter Taichiliberal
- Start date
yah, I mean dude, its so lame to compare constitutional rights with constitutional rights......doncha know?.....
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
No. I would argue that I would be much effective in a confined area with my .45
Magazine holds thirteen rounds
Much more lethal round
I can carry 15 magazines
I can be more mobile
I am very accurate with my .45 ACP
you aren’t being an honest broker which suspected
So my question to you is what is it about the AR15 that makes you want to get rid of it so badly? Why don’t you want to ban others?
But he had a fair amount of ecperience with firearms.
which is also what gun free zones do.
It's also easy using gasoline and a match, or explosives.
You flatter me sir!
- piffle -
"No right is absolute. Conversely, no government authority is absolute." lawyer, law Professor and former ACLU head Nadine Strossen
Yes we have 2nd Amendment rights.
No, our 2nd Amendment rights do not include anti-aircraft artillery, machine guns etc.
And weapons are ROUTINELY banned:
- in public schools
- courts of law
- airports
- aboard commercial airliners
- U.S. post offices
- etc.
Where do you get such ridiculous notions?
Have you considered using your head for something beyond keeping rain out of your neck?
I invite you to post your reason why our 1st Amendment right should not protect this fundamental instrument of free speech.
Banning the computer keyboard in the 3rd millennium would be as unlikely as banning the feather (quill pen) in the 18th century.
Quite likely.
And while I deduce you understand this, some others in this thread may not.
The close-quarters advantages of the handgun diminish fairly rapidly as distance to target increases.
At 200 meters and more, the long gun tends to have the advantage. Snipers don't commonly choose a snubnosed .38 as their tool of the trade.
BUT !!
If the issue is self-defense, many self-defense scenarios involve attackers at very close range, sometimes within arm's reach.
If the perceived threat is 30 meters or more away, in what way is it a threat?
PS
And I doubt he was a U.S. military combat veteran.
Proficiency isn't a binary. It's a spectrum.
The difference is, even if he was the best shooter ever born, he used the weapon he used.
And whether he could have tallied as many corpses with a Winchester pump, many could not. That's the distinction. The AR-15 make such massacres easy, even for those with limited training or experience.
BUT !!
When such "gun free zones" are the size of Canada, or Australia, it seems to be a different story.
But smuggling gasoline into a school in a hip-flask might only bring enough to cause a small disturbance, potentially undetected at the time (discovered only later by the scorch marks).
Smuggling in enough gasoline to kill a room full of agile children before they could escape would I suspect, be a nearly impossible logistical obstacle (thank goodness).
The truck-bomb is quite an able weapon. President Reagan proved that.
But these school shooters seem to have skipped a cog. They seem to be as enmeshed in their choice of weapon, as their lethal objective.
McVeigh was an exception. McVeigh's motive seems to be vengeance for the Branch Davidian genocide. What was Dylan Kleebold's motive?
How old was he? 20? So he didn't have decades of experience.
And I doubt he was a U.S. military combat veteran.
Proficiency isn't a binary. It's a spectrum.
The difference is, even if he was the best shooter ever born, he used the weapon he used.
And whether he could have tallied as many corpses with a Winchester pump, many could not. That's the distinction. The AR-15 make such massacres easy, even for those with limited training or experience.
They can, when they're the size of a school building.
BUT !!
When such "gun free zones" are the size of Canada, or Australia, it seems to be a different story.
So one might imagine.
But smuggling gasoline into a school in a hip-flask might only bring enough to cause a small disturbance, potentially undetected at the time (discovered only later by the scorch marks).
Smuggling in enough gasoline to kill a room full of agile children before they could escape would I suspect, be a nearly impossible logistical obstacle (thank goodness).
The truck-bomb is quite an able weapon. President Reagan proved that.
But these school shooters seem to have skipped a cog. They seem to be as enmeshed in their choice of weapon, as their lethal objective.
McVeigh was an exception. McVeigh's motive seems to be vengeance for the Branch Davidian genocide. What was Dylan Kleebold's motive?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I did it for 6 years as an active duty marine, or was that also a penis extension at that time? was I playing marine at that time? Do you think that because my time as an active duty marine is in the past, that I was officially deprogrammed by the government to become a servile citizen again and thus am incapable of using a weapon as anything other than a penis extension?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you really don't like to read things correctly, do you? I did not say you don't believe in the 2nd Amendment, I said you don't believe that it is about individual rights as citizen militias. and by LAW, one actually CAN OWN a fully automatic. it just has to be one manufactured before May 1st, 1986. The AR15 is modeled after the M16, minus the select fire switch.
My, you danced poorly in your own bullshit. maybe you should try it again.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
but i'll just bet that your sorry statist ass LOVES the idea of law enforcement having these AR15 'patrol' rifles instead of those awful AR15 'assault' rifles, don't ya pooh?
Theoretically possible?
There it is folks. Another example that there really IS such as thing as a stupid question!
Body Dumbo, continuing the tradition of RW stupidity on this forum.
^There it is folks. Another example of a RW fucktard demonstrating his massive ignorance of Constitutional rights.
Run along, Dumbo, you’re out of your league.
Ruh roh. Another concocted “could have”.
countryboy
Verified User
Lol, long guns are one of the worst weapons for close quarters defense.
Superfreak
Verified User
You did lie. The AR15 is not an assault rifle. No matter what it was in the 50's, it is not an assault rifle today. Quit lying.