A message from a veteran about firearms in this country

[Crixus]

Thanks for the update. I went another way with two AKs and an AR-10.....and a shitload of ammo.

For fun, I also have a 1943 Mosin-Nagant and a Zastava M48 (Mauser 8mm). Both are hanging in my man cave. I'm thinking of adding an Enfield .303 No. 4 Mk 2 to the collection, but thinking it's too much diversification.

IMO the No. 4 Mk II is the finest bolt action battle rifle ever made.

If I were going to war with a bolt gun I would say hell yeah. The sorters you find now and again are pretty nice to. There was also a company years ago who redid them in 45/70 and sold it as a hog gun. In Australia I read years ago that it was popular to convert them to 7.62x39 as well. Would love to have a 45/70 one, but .303 and .308 versions are awesome as they are.

Marine Corps philosophy is "one shot, one kill". This means not only precision, but intelligent use of offensive arms.

A long range (500-700M) single shot weapon can turn a war is it is used properly. This doesn't mean the LW anti-gun assholes are correct, just that any weapon can be deadly if use efficiently.

This is what kills me, it is completely legal for me to have a cannon, a damp 16 pounder fully functioned and mounted in the back of my truck, bassicaly making it a technical capible of causing mass casualties for about nothing cost wise, yet they want my AR?

More likely it would be an 18 pounder. There were 16's but they were very uncommon. In general the cannon projectile weights ran 2, 4, 6 (mounted artillery), 9, 12 (the famous Napoleon of Civil War fame), 18, 24, 32, and the 68 pounder carronade as mounted on Nelsons Victory.

Intresting facts there. But it's still weird, I mean, how would it go if I loaded a cannon, hell, a home made cannon up with 8 pounds of 16 penny nails and shot it into a crowed? I don't mean to give the left ideas, but still. The hole thing is so stupid. For my part, I would love to own a cannon, but Dixie gun works is the only place I know that sells them and I don't have the money for the cannon nor the time to build a proper carrage. And shot, where would I get it? I head a soup can filled with cement is a good cheap option.

 

[westwall]

IMO the No. 4 Mk II is the finest bolt action battle rifle ever made.

If I were going to war with a bolt gun I would say hell yeah. The sorters you find now and again are pretty nice to. There was also a company years ago who redid them in 45/70 and sold it as a hog gun. In Australia I read years ago that it was popular to convert them to 7.62x39 as well. Would love to have a 45/70 one, but .303 and .308 versions are awesome as they are.

Marine Corps philosophy is "one shot, one kill". This means not only precision, but intelligent use of offensive arms.

A long range (500-700M) single shot weapon can turn a war is it is used properly. This doesn't mean the LW anti-gun assholes are correct, just that any weapon can be deadly if use efficiently.

This is what kills me, it is completely legal for me to have a cannon, a damp 16 pounder fully functioned and mounted in the back of my truck, bassicaly making it a technical capible of causing mass casualties for about nothing cost wise, yet they want my AR?

More likely it would be an 18 pounder. There were 16's but they were very uncommon. In general the cannon projectile weights ran 2, 4, 6 (mounted artillery), 9, 12 (the famous Napoleon of Civil War fame), 18, 24, 32, and the 68 pounder carronade as mounted on Nelsons Victory.

Intresting facts there. But it's still weird, I mean, how would it go if I loaded a cannon, hell, a home made cannon up with 8 pounds of 16 penny nails and shot it into a crowed? I don't mean to give the left ideas, but still. The hole thing is so stupid. For my part, I would love to own a cannon, but Dixie gun works is the only place I know that sells them and I don't have the money for the cannon nor the time to build a proper carrage. And shot, where would I get it? I head a soup can filled with cement is a good cheap option.

The logical reason is a cannon is....welll, kinda large. You ain't going to be hiding it any time soon! As far as buying them there are cannon dealers out there. A real, legit 12 Pounder Napoleon will set you back at least 25,000 for a real one. They make 1/2 scale repros for around 5K IIRC.

 

[Canon Shooter]

And don;t give me the bs that concealed carry decreases crime. It has been proven, by STANFORD UNIVERSITY, that concealed carry actually INCREASES violent crime:

I'd be hard-pressed to give a fuck what Stanford University says. I've used my concealed firearm to protect me and my loved ones twice.

That's the only data I need...

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I am a veteran of the United States Army. I served as a 12B (Combat Engineer) in the 37th Engineer Battalion, part of the illustrious 82nd Airborne Division

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield. When we trained with our weapons, we had to shoot a "qualification" test. We were presented with forty popup targets, one after another at different distances, from fifty to three hundred meters, all in very quick succession. We had to kill at least twenty three targets to pass the test, but most of us, including those of us who never fired a gun before, easily shot thirty or more targets. All this was in the span of less than two minutes, and we even had to reload once in that time. I don't get why any civilian needs to kill thirty people in two minutes, unless he is deliberately causing carnage and mass death.

The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name. The only difference is that it does not have burst capacity. That is not nearly as big a difference as the NRA makes it out to be. We never, ever used burst mode in the military, since it wasted ammo, was inaccurate, and generally useless. Besides for that difference, the AR 15 is the exact same as the M4. The M4's features are designed to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, including a detachable magazine which allows for rapid reloading and a buffer tube and muzzle brake which dampens recoil, so that a shooter can fire off a large number of rounds with minimal affect on accuracy.

All the arguments about " I need my AR 15 for hunting" or "I need my Ar15 for self defense" are entirely ridiculous. The 5.56 Nato round, which the Ar15 uses, is designed to pierce body armor. Which deer wears body armor? And your fantasies about shooting fifteen home invaders at once is just that: a fantasy which will likely never happen. The only real purpose of the AR 15 in American society is to kill large numbers of clubgoers, schoolchildren, or innocent bystanders at a time.

And for those of you who claim that "my Ar15 will protect me from tyranny," guess what, you're wrong. In my time in the military, I saw that no civilian rebellion would ever stand a chance against us. We have M1 Abrams tanks which can survive multiple rocket hits. We have drones which can bomb your house while being controlled by a person a thousand miles away. If worst came to worst, we have nuclear weapons which can quickly bring a seceding city or state into the stone age.

let's also talk about concealed carry. You are civilians. You are not deployed to a foreign country halfway around the globe. You are not fighting basically an entire for the sake of securing their oil supplies. You are not under constant threat of attack from people defending their homes from foreign invaders.

Therefore, you have no reason to carry a gun in public. Nobody needs to carry a handgun into mcDonald's or into a bank. You are not in a war zone.

And don;t give me the bs that concealed carry decreases crime. It has been proven, by STANFORD UNIVERSITY, that concealed carry actually INCREASES violent crime:

Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

Trust me, I used to be an NRA member myself when i was 18. I bought into the propaganda because i was stupid, uninformed, and thought it was fun to play with guns. After joining the military, I learned to treat firearms, especially assault rifles, as tools of death and destruction, something which should be kept out of most civilian hands.

The right wing claims to respect veterans, so please listen to the words of a former soldier. I trained with assault rifles. I carried an assault rifle as part of my job. I can tell you that the military M-4 and the Ar-15 are nearly identical, and that no civilian needs a weapon designed to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes.

Dear LORD, you are such a fucking liar.

Where do these trolls come from?

 

[InspectorDetector]

I am a veteran of the United States Army. I served as a 12B (Combat Engineer) in the 37th Engineer Battalion, part of the illustrious 82nd Airborne Division

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield. When we trained with our weapons, we had to shoot a "qualification" test. We were presented with forty popup targets, one after another at different distances, from fifty to three hundred meters, all in very quick succession. We had to kill at least twenty three targets to pass the test, but most of us, including those of us who never fired a gun before, easily shot thirty or more targets. All this was in the span of less than two minutes, and we even had to reload once in that time. I don't get why any civilian needs to kill thirty people in two minutes, unless he is deliberately causing carnage and mass death.

The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name. The only difference is that it does not have burst capacity. That is not nearly as big a difference as the NRA makes it out to be. We never, ever used burst mode in the military, since it wasted ammo, was inaccurate, and generally useless. Besides for that difference, the AR 15 is the exact same as the M4. The M4's features are designed to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, including a detachable magazine which allows for rapid reloading and a buffer tube and muzzle brake which dampens recoil, so that a shooter can fire off a large number of rounds with minimal affect on accuracy.

All the arguments about " I need my AR 15 for hunting" or "I need my Ar15 for self defense" are entirely ridiculous. The 5.56 Nato round, which the Ar15 uses, is designed to pierce body armor. Which deer wears body armor? And your fantasies about shooting fifteen home invaders at once is just that: a fantasy which will likely never happen. The only real purpose of the AR 15 in American society is to kill large numbers of clubgoers, schoolchildren, or innocent bystanders at a time.

And for those of you who claim that "my Ar15 will protect me from tyranny," guess what, you're wrong. In my time in the military, I saw that no civilian rebellion would ever stand a chance against us. We have M1 Abrams tanks which can survive multiple rocket hits. We have drones which can bomb your house while being controlled by a person a thousand miles away. If worst came to worst, we have nuclear weapons which can quickly bring a seceding city or state into the stone age.

let's also talk about concealed carry. You are civilians. You are not deployed to a foreign country halfway around the globe. You are not fighting basically an entire for the sake of securing their oil supplies. You are not under constant threat of attack from people defending their homes from foreign invaders.

Therefore, you have no reason to carry a gun in public. Nobody needs to carry a handgun into mcDonald's or into a bank. You are not in a war zone.

And don;t give me the bs that concealed carry decreases crime. It has been proven, by STANFORD UNIVERSITY, that concealed carry actually INCREASES violent crime:

Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

Trust me, I used to be an NRA member myself when i was 18. I bought into the propaganda because i was stupid, uninformed, and thought it was fun to play with guns. After joining the military, I learned to treat firearms, especially assault rifles, as tools of death and destruction, something which should be kept out of most civilian hands.

The right wing claims to respect veterans, so please listen to the words of a former soldier. I trained with assault rifles. I carried an assault rifle as part of my job. I can tell you that the military M-4 and the Ar-15 are nearly identical, and that no civilian needs a weapon designed to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes.

Good lord guy.....I am a combat vet myself (Viet Nam) and I can't believe what I just read. First - you are full of fecal matter. The M4 and the AR15 are WORLDS apart, or didn't you know this? remember the "fun switch"? Well, "Veteran" the AR-15 doesn't have one making it a SEMI-AUTO weapon.

I carried concealed as soon as I transitioned From 11B to CID Agent (they had a drastic need). I have cried for the past 22 years until I retired and have carried every day since.

I'm sorry, but I am ashamed of your "facts"..........

 

[InspectorDetector]

Didn't you take an oath to defend the Constitution? Do you happen to know what it says? JW

The constitution says that "the people" as a whole are allowed to bear arms to form "well regulated militias"

Basically, there is a collective right for civilians to form an armed force to stand by in readiness to defend the country. The second amendment is therefore fulfilled by the existence of the U.S military

In the words of George Washington:

"A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington

 

[toobfreak]

I am a veteran of the United States Army. I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. Therefore, you have no reason to carry a gun in public. Nobody needs to carry a handgun into mcDonald's or into a bank. You are not in a war zone.

Hey Idiot. You are an Army vet yet think an AR-15 pop gun is an /assault/ weapon? Are we turning out idiots in our military now? No one owns an assault weapon for a long time now unless you have a federal stamp to buy and own them. And if you think America is not a war zone, you've not been reading the news for a year.

You don't need to understand why anyone wants to own or carry anything--- --- firearm ownership is not conditional on your approval. Guns are for sport, hunting, history, collection, self defense, and yes, more.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Just what idiot decided Americans had to prove they had to have a "need" for something? Do women "need" whatever silly thing fashion dictates they buy? Do people "need" a selection of expensive clubs with which to bludgeon defenseless little spheres around a golf course? I think not. Law abiding citizens have a Constitutional right to be armed or unarmed and to own what they wish (not "need") no matter how silly others think it is.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Didn't you take an oath to defend the Constitution? Do you happen to know what it says? JW

The constitution says that "the people" as a whole are allowed to bear arms to form "well regulated militias"

Basically, there is a collective right for civilians to form an armed force to stand by in readiness to defend the country. The second amendment is therefore fulfilled by the existence of the U.S military

In the words of George Washington:

"A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington

I have used that quote many times and no one can question the intent or mince Washington's words there.

The people should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain independence from government (those who would attempt to abuse). There is no question about the intent.

We cannot have or maintain independence from government if government has a monopoly on force or has stripped the people of sufficient arms so that abuse is commonplace.

Therefore, at a minimum, each American should be entitled to that which a soldier in a modern army would carry.

Machine guns. Assault rifles. Hand grenades. RPG's. Body armor. Claymore's and other mine devices.

If our government sees fit to arm a soldier of the standing army with such items, government has admitted that such items are necessary for people to remain independent, as our first president deemed necessary.

Give me my machine gun.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Didn't you take an oath to defend the Constitution? Do you happen to know what it says? JW

The constitution says that "the people" as a whole are allowed to bear arms to form "well regulated militias"

Basically, there is a collective right for civilians to form an armed force to stand by in readiness to defend the country. The second amendment is therefore fulfilled by the existence of the U.S military

It does not satyt that.

It refers to the people and means INDIVIDUAL citizens whether part of the milita or not.

This former combat engineer is an idiot. Wars against modern military machiens have been won by people witha few guns

 

[9thIDdoc]

 

[toobfreak]

Let's be clear about what an actual ASSAULT weapon is. Here are assault rifles. YOU DON'T OWN ONE:





I suggest the OP go down to these good ol' boys and tell them they don't need their guns and see what he gets in his face.

 

[InspectorDetector]

Let's be clear about what an actual ASSAULT weapon is. Here are assault rifles. YOU DON'T OWN ONE:





I suggest the OP go down to these good ol' boys and tell them they don't need their guns and see what he gets in his face.

When I was stationed at Fort Knox, I used to head over to knob creek every now and again to shoot my various weapons. Good guys - nice range!

 

[AZrailwhale]

I am a veteran of the United States Army. I served as a 12B (Combat Engineer) in the 37th Engineer Battalion, part of the illustrious 82nd Airborne Division

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield. When we trained with our weapons, we had to shoot a "qualification" test. We were presented with forty popup targets, one after another at different distances, from fifty to three hundred meters, all in very quick succession. We had to kill at least twenty three targets to pass the test, but most of us, including those of us who never fired a gun before, easily shot thirty or more targets. All this was in the span of less than two minutes, and we even had to reload once in that time. I don't get why any civilian needs to kill thirty people in two minutes, unless he is deliberately causing carnage and mass death.

The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name. The only difference is that it does not have burst capacity. That is not nearly as big a difference as the NRA makes it out to be. We never, ever used burst mode in the military, since it wasted ammo, was inaccurate, and generally useless. Besides for that difference, the AR 15 is the exact same as the M4. The M4's features are designed to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, including a detachable magazine which allows for rapid reloading and a buffer tube and muzzle brake which dampens recoil, so that a shooter can fire off a large number of rounds with minimal affect on accuracy.

All the arguments about " I need my AR 15 for hunting" or "I need my Ar15 for self defense" are entirely ridiculous. The 5.56 Nato round, which the Ar15 uses, is designed to pierce body armor. Which deer wears body armor? And your fantasies about shooting fifteen home invaders at once is just that: a fantasy which will likely never happen. The only real purpose of the AR 15 in American society is to kill large numbers of clubgoers, schoolchildren, or innocent bystanders at a time.

And for those of you who claim that "my Ar15 will protect me from tyranny," guess what, you're wrong. In my time in the military, I saw that no civilian rebellion would ever stand a chance against us. We have M1 Abrams tanks which can survive multiple rocket hits. We have drones which can bomb your house while being controlled by a person a thousand miles away. If worst came to worst, we have nuclear weapons which can quickly bring a seceding city or state into the stone age.

let's also talk about concealed carry. You are civilians. You are not deployed to a foreign country halfway around the globe. You are not fighting basically an entire for the sake of securing their oil supplies. You are not under constant threat of attack from people defending their homes from foreign invaders.

Therefore, you have no reason to carry a gun in public. Nobody needs to carry a handgun into mcDonald's or into a bank. You are not in a war zone.

And don;t give me the bs that concealed carry decreases crime. It has been proven, by STANFORD UNIVERSITY, that concealed carry actually INCREASES violent crime:

Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

Trust me, I used to be an NRA member myself when i was 18. I bought into the propaganda because i was stupid, uninformed, and thought it was fun to play with guns. After joining the military, I learned to treat firearms, especially assault rifles, as tools of death and destruction, something which should be kept out of most civilian hands.

The right wing claims to respect veterans, so please listen to the words of a former soldier. I trained with assault rifles. I carried an assault rifle as part of my job. I can tell you that the military M-4 and the Ar-15 are nearly identical, and that no civilian needs a weapon designed to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes.

Explain how the VC, ISIS, and the Taliban ran rings around all those Tanks and Drones. By your logic, all these brushfire wars should have been a walkover for the USA.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I am a veteran of the United States Army. I served as a 12B (Combat Engineer) in the 37th Engineer Battalion, part of the illustrious 82nd Airborne Division

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield. When we trained with our weapons, we had to shoot a "qualification" test. We were presented with forty popup targets, one after another at different distances, from fifty to three hundred meters, all in very quick succession. We had to kill at least twenty three targets to pass the test, but most of us, including those of us who never fired a gun before, easily shot thirty or more targets. All this was in the span of less than two minutes, and we even had to reload once in that time. I don't get why any civilian needs to kill thirty people in two minutes, unless he is deliberately causing carnage and mass death.

The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name. The only difference is that it does not have burst capacity. That is not nearly as big a difference as the NRA makes it out to be. We never, ever used burst mode in the military, since it wasted ammo, was inaccurate, and generally useless. Besides for that difference, the AR 15 is the exact same as the M4. The M4's features are designed to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, including a detachable magazine which allows for rapid reloading and a buffer tube and muzzle brake which dampens recoil, so that a shooter can fire off a large number of rounds with minimal affect on accuracy.

All the arguments about " I need my AR 15 for hunting" or "I need my Ar15 for self defense" are entirely ridiculous. The 5.56 Nato round, which the Ar15 uses, is designed to pierce body armor. Which deer wears body armor? And your fantasies about shooting fifteen home invaders at once is just that: a fantasy which will likely never happen. The only real purpose of the AR 15 in American society is to kill large numbers of clubgoers, schoolchildren, or innocent bystanders at a time.

And for those of you who claim that "my Ar15 will protect me from tyranny," guess what, you're wrong. In my time in the military, I saw that no civilian rebellion would ever stand a chance against us. We have M1 Abrams tanks which can survive multiple rocket hits. We have drones which can bomb your house while being controlled by a person a thousand miles away. If worst came to worst, we have nuclear weapons which can quickly bring a seceding city or state into the stone age.

let's also talk about concealed carry. You are civilians. You are not deployed to a foreign country halfway around the globe. You are not fighting basically an entire for the sake of securing their oil supplies. You are not under constant threat of attack from people defending their homes from foreign invaders.

Therefore, you have no reason to carry a gun in public. Nobody needs to carry a handgun into mcDonald's or into a bank. You are not in a war zone.

And don;t give me the bs that concealed carry decreases crime. It has been proven, by STANFORD UNIVERSITY, that concealed carry actually INCREASES violent crime:

Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

Trust me, I used to be an NRA member myself when i was 18. I bought into the propaganda because i was stupid, uninformed, and thought it was fun to play with guns. After joining the military, I learned to treat firearms, especially assault rifles, as tools of death and destruction, something which should be kept out of most civilian hands.

The right wing claims to respect veterans, so please listen to the words of a former soldier. I trained with assault rifles. I carried an assault rifle as part of my job. I can tell you that the military M-4 and the Ar-15 are nearly identical, and that no civilian needs a weapon designed to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes.

Define an assault Rifle, Herr democrat?

{The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name.}

That's a fucking lie - and proves you've never been in the military nor fired an M4.

You're just another Nazi with stolen valor in order to attack the civil rights of Americans.

Fuck off.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Didn't you take an oath to defend the Constitution? Do you happen to know what it says? JW

The constitution says that "the people" as a whole are allowed to bear arms to form "well regulated militias"

Basically, there is a collective right for civilians to form an armed force to stand by in readiness to defend the country. The second amendment is therefore fulfilled by the existence of the U.S military

Sure Herr Nazi..

 

[Uncensored2008]

I've shot the M4 carbine and the M16 rifle, both of which are exactly the same as the AR15, with an additional burst mode which we never used once in the military, sicne the semi automatic mode was even MORE effective at killing large numbers of people in a short period of time

No you haven't.

You're a fucking liar with stolen valor.

Just another Nazi pile of shit attacking civil rights.

 

[Rigby5]

I am a veteran of the United States Army. I served as a 12B (Combat Engineer) in the 37th Engineer Battalion, part of the illustrious 82nd Airborne Division

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield. When we trained with our weapons, we had to shoot a "qualification" test. We were presented with forty popup targets, one after another at different distances, from fifty to three hundred meters, all in very quick succession. We had to kill at least twenty three targets to pass the test, but most of us, including those of us who never fired a gun before, easily shot thirty or more targets. All this was in the span of less than two minutes, and we even had to reload once in that time. I don't get why any civilian needs to kill thirty people in two minutes, unless he is deliberately causing carnage and mass death.

The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name. The only difference is that it does not have burst capacity. That is not nearly as big a difference as the NRA makes it out to be. We never, ever used burst mode in the military, since it wasted ammo, was inaccurate, and generally useless. Besides for that difference, the AR 15 is the exact same as the M4. The M4's features are designed to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, including a detachable magazine which allows for rapid reloading and a buffer tube and muzzle brake which dampens recoil, so that a shooter can fire off a large number of rounds with minimal affect on accuracy.

All the arguments about " I need my AR 15 for hunting" or "I need my Ar15 for self defense" are entirely ridiculous. The 5.56 Nato round, which the Ar15 uses, is designed to pierce body armor. Which deer wears body armor? And your fantasies about shooting fifteen home invaders at once is just that: a fantasy which will likely never happen. The only real purpose of the AR 15 in American society is to kill large numbers of clubgoers, schoolchildren, or innocent bystanders at a time.

And for those of you who claim that "my Ar15 will protect me from tyranny," guess what, you're wrong. In my time in the military, I saw that no civilian rebellion would ever stand a chance against us. We have M1 Abrams tanks which can survive multiple rocket hits. We have drones which can bomb your house while being controlled by a person a thousand miles away. If worst came to worst, we have nuclear weapons which can quickly bring a seceding city or state into the stone age.

let's also talk about concealed carry. You are civilians. You are not deployed to a foreign country halfway around the globe. You are not fighting basically an entire for the sake of securing their oil supplies. You are not under constant threat of attack from people defending their homes from foreign invaders.

Therefore, you have no reason to carry a gun in public. Nobody needs to carry a handgun into mcDonald's or into a bank. You are not in a war zone.

And don;t give me the bs that concealed carry decreases crime. It has been proven, by STANFORD UNIVERSITY, that concealed carry actually INCREASES violent crime:

Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

Trust me, I used to be an NRA member myself when i was 18. I bought into the propaganda because i was stupid, uninformed, and thought it was fun to play with guns. After joining the military, I learned to treat firearms, especially assault rifles, as tools of death and destruction, something which should be kept out of most civilian hands.

The right wing claims to respect veterans, so please listen to the words of a former soldier. I trained with assault rifles. I carried an assault rifle as part of my job. I can tell you that the military M-4 and the Ar-15 are nearly identical, and that no civilian needs a weapon designed to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes.

One of the dumbest posts I ever read.

The .223 caliber bullet of the AR-15 is NOT designed to pierce body armor and it not even half as powerful as the ammunition commonly used in WWII or WWI.
It is the least lethal bullet ever used by the US military, and likely should never have been used by the US military because it is so weak that it has very little range.
The main problem with the AR-15 .223 is that it is so weak that many states won't even allow it for deer hunting.

And yes you DO need to carry a handgun into a bank some times.
If you just sold a car on craigslist, for example, you could be carrying thousands in cash, and you DO need to be able to defend that cash.

As for the Stanford research claiming that more guns carried increases, crime, that is ridiculous. There was absolutely no cause and effect connection discovered at all.

And the stupidest things was to say that civilians can't prevent a police state take over because the government has weapons like tanks, missiles, and nuclear weapons. Why that is ridiculous is because the US military lost to the VC and to the Taliban, who did not have tanks, missiles, or nuclear weapons.
That is because the general population does not have to hold territory like conventional forces do. Instead with a rebellion you use an insurgency, hit and run tactics. Its called asymmetric warfare. You don't try to match the opposing force on their ground. You wait until they get out of their tanks and planes, before you shoot them. But you should know that if you were in the military? Why is it someone who should be familiar with our losses in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, etc., does not seem to know the basics of warfare?

Ask someone who actually knows something about firearms before making such foolish statements.

 

[Rigby5]

The right to bear arms is a Constitutional right, not an inalienable right.

The Constitution was made to be amended.

Wrong.
The only mention of arms in the constitution is the prohibition against any federal weapons jurisdiction in the 2nd Amendment.
That is not granting or creating a right, and the constitution can't create rights.
Rights have to exist first, before we could have the authority to write a constitution or make a government.
It can be good to amend the Constitution, but not to reduce the restriction on federal weapons laws, but to restate them more strongly, since for some reason the existing restrictions are being ignored and the federal government is illegally legislating weapons restrictions.

 

[justinacolmena]

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield

Dude. If we are are attacked in our homes by enemy forces, and our front lawns become battlefields, we have the right to defend ourselves as in any other war.