forums

Off-Topic Mass killings

Advertisement
Suhrthing said:
Semantics, "we never said banning guns would stop EVERY SINGLE mass shooting" lol. 'Safe and effective' comes to mind...
Click to expand...
I've never been for banning weapons. Just from a practical standpoint in the USA, that horse left the barn a century ago or more.

I do wish, however, someone could definitively tell me why anyone would need or, more importantly, want an AR-type of weapon. I mean, a handgun for protection or enjoying target practice, a hunting rifle, I understand ...
 
hotshot said:
I've never been for banning weapons. Just from a practical standpoint in the USA, that horse left the barn a century ago or more.

I do wish, however, someone could definitively tell me why anyone would need or, more importantly, want an AR-type of weapon. I mean, a handgun for protection or enjoying target practice, a hunting rifle, I understand ...
Click to expand...
I could tell you, but in all honesty - it's none of your business how or why I choose to exercise my liberties as a free American.
 
hotshot said:
I've never been for banning weapons. Just from a practical standpoint in the USA, that horse left the barn a century ago or more.

I do wish, however, someone could definitively tell me why anyone would need or, more importantly, want an AR-type of weapon. I mean, a handgun for protection or enjoying target practice, a hunting rifle, I understand ...
Click to expand...
Just an observation, but isn't it interesting how so many who follow the tenet of "Constitutional Originalism" pick and choose where they deem it appropriate? The one place they seemingly forget about it is when it comes to the topic of the 2nd Amendment.
 
hotshot said:
I've never been for banning weapons. Just from a practical standpoint in the USA, that horse left the barn a century ago or more.

I do wish, however, someone could definitively tell me why anyone would need or, more importantly, want an AR-type of weapon. I mean, a handgun for protection or enjoying target practice, a hunting rifle, I understand ...
Click to expand...
The “why do you need something I don’t care about“ is a bad standard to start.
 
PanteraCanes said:
The “why do you need something I don’t care about“ is a bad standard to start.
Click to expand...
I think it's a legit question when the weapon(s) we're talking about can kill so many in a matter of just a few seconds. That's the "standard," not whether it's just some item I don't care to possess myself.

I mean, why not allow people then to have machine guns, sawed-offs, grenades, rocket launchers, etc? Who got to "decide" that these were "illegal" to own in this country?
 
hotshot said:
I think it's a legit question when the weapon(s) we're talking about can kill so many in a matter of just a few seconds. That's the "standard," not whether it's just some item I don't care to possess myself.

I mean, why not allow people then to have machine guns, sawed-offs, grenades, rocket launchers, etc? Who got to "decide" that these were "illegal" to own in this country?
Click to expand...
Right! I agree. They were legal forever, and then some 'non-originalist', pencil pushing geeks in congress decided law-abiding Americans could not longer be entrusted with them; and sht all over the CONUS, as per usual.
 
Advertisement
hotshot said:
I've never been for banning weapons. Just from a practical standpoint in the USA, that horse left the barn a century ago or more.

I do wish, however, someone could definitively tell me why anyone would need or, more importantly, want an AR-type of weapon. I mean, a handgun for protection or enjoying target practice, a hunting rifle, I understand ...
Click to expand...
Boom... another liberal media and dumb congress person's talking point

"why would anyone need a weapon of war"

Why don't you ask someone who owns one? They will tell you what they use it for (edit... well, some people will tell you... just not @Suhrthing !)

But their goal isn't just banning AR-15s... they have far greater ambitions.
 
ithacane said:
Boom... another liberal media and dumb congress person's talking point

"why would anyone need a weapon of war"

Why don't you ask someone who owns one? They will tell you what they use it for (edit... well, some people will tell you... just not @Suhrthing !)

But their goal isn't just banning AR-15s... they have far greater ambitions.
Click to expand...
1671549181752.png

"You need nukes and F15's to take on the government, so we'll just take your guns since they're a lost cause." #LaWjiCkS
 
hotshot said:
I've never been for banning weapons. Just from a practical standpoint in the USA, that horse left the barn a century ago or more.

I do wish, however, someone could definitively tell me why anyone would need or, more importantly, want an AR-type of weapon. I mean, a handgun for protection or enjoying target practice, a hunting rifle, I understand ...
Click to expand...
Why do people need a Ferrari? Max speed limit in the US is 75, but the car will take you to 200.
 
hotshot said:
I think it's a legit question when the weapon(s) we're talking about can kill so many in a matter of just a few seconds. That's the "standard," not whether it's just some item I don't care to possess myself.

I mean, why not allow people then to have machine guns, sawed-offs, grenades, rocket launchers, etc? Who got to "decide" that these were "illegal" to own in this country?
Click to expand...
You can own fully automatic weapons, explosives, etc. depending on what state you live in. You just have to register with the fedgov. NFA list has a wide array of fun toys on it.
 
PCBcanefan said:
Why do people need a Ferrari? Max speed limit in the US is 75, but the car will take you to 200.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. And a Ferrari doing 200 could become a weapon to kill a lot of people. Difference is any idiot can get a rapid fire rifle; only a few can buy a Ferrari. But I get ur point.
 
Advertisement
hotshot said:
Fair enough. And a Ferrari doing 200 could become a weapon to kill a lot of people. Difference is any idiot can get a rapid fire rifle; only a few can buy a Ferrari. But I get ur point.
Click to expand...
WTF is a rapid-fire rifle?

No 'idiot' can just get one. Do you know how expensive and rare automatic weapons are on the US market? It's easier to find a US-made one in Afghanistan!

Go bring back the APCs, Blackhawks and M16's you left in AFG before you lecture us on the dangers of American and their firearms.
 
Suhrthing said:
WTF is a rapid-fire rifle?

No 'idiot' can just get one. Do you know how expensive and rare automatic weapons are on the US market? It's easier to find a US-made one in Afghanistan!

Go bring back the APCs, Blackhawks and M16's you left in AFG before you lecture us on the dangers of American and their firearms.
Click to expand...
This is correct. Most people who own NFA list weapons, are collectors.
 
Here we go again with a basic lack of understanding of what a rifle is.

People literally want to ban a brand name.

Without understanding what the difference is, if any, other than semantics and appearance between an AR and a rifle - how many times do we have to go through this?

That’s like saying you want to ban Coca-Cola, but Check cola, RC cola, and all the other colas are OK. They’re all sugar water.

Please educate yourselves then we can come back and discuss it.
 
Suhrthing said:
Do you know how many crimes have been committed with legally owned automatic rifles? You should google it.
Click to expand...
Will do.

Off the top of my head, though, Newtown, Parkland, the Chicago area massacre, the church and school shootings in TX. Weren't those all done with legally-owned rapid fire weapons?
 
Back
Top