“Hell yes we are going to take your AR-15”

[BULLDOG]

What possible reason would anyone have to do that? It didn't take an amendment to get fully automatic weapons off the street.

That's funny! I can buy a fully automatic weapon at any number of gun stores in my local area. You are an idiot of the highest caliber!

You have now reached the credibility point of an idiot who argues that the world is flat. While there is a rout for an average person to own a fully automatic weapon, they are no where near as accessible as other types of guns. I'll leave you to your silly babbling now.

You said it was impossible or words to that effect. Failure!

Please point to the post where I said impossible, or words to that effect.

You said, "What possible reason would anyone have to do that? It didn't take an amendment to get fully automatic weapons off the street.."
That is not totally accurate.
Fully automatic weapons were cheap and available mail order after WWI, with Thompson machineguns going for less than $30, but almost no one wanted them. The only reason they became a problem was Prohibition, which caused large amounts of unprotected cash and turf wars. The problem was not Thompson machineguns, but that Prohibition of Alcohol was illegal and irrational.
While we then did pass laws to make machineguns more difficult to buy legally, they are still cheap and easy to obtain illegally, and the laws never had anything at all to do with their small number on the street. The reality is they are hard to conceal, so are almost never used in crime.
So your claim that laws succeeded with fully automatic weapons is just wrong.
And even more important is the fact that federal gun laws are also inherently illegal.
While people accepted them due to the bad media coverage of things like the St. Valentines day massacre, the reality is that no federal weapons law has ever been legal, they were never a good idea, and they never improved anything.
So in general your claim was wrong, that more federal laws helped in the past.
That is not accurate that federal laws helped, nor are things better now.
Weapons are supposed to be under state and local jurisdiction only.
It would be like the EU suddenly made strict gun laws in Europe, totally violating the sovereignty of countries like Switzerland that do not have strict gun laws.

4 quick takeaways from your post.
1. Asking for a possible reason is not the same as saying something is impossible. You are either just that dumb, or are tying to misdirect what was said.
2 You think a fully auto M16 is not as widespread in it's use by civilians as an ar15 because it is harder to conceal, even though they are basically the same gun, and indistinguishable from each other at a few feet.
3. You think all federal gun laws are unconstitutional. That's just ridiculous.
4. You're just another raving gun nut who will say anything, no matter how absurd, to defend your gun fetish.

 

[BULLDOG]

You have now reached the credibility point of an idiot who argues that the world is flat. While there is a rout for an average person to own a fully automatic weapon, they are no where near as accessible as other types of guns. I'll leave you to your silly babbling now.

You said it was impossible or words to that effect. Failure!

Please point to the post where I said impossible, or words to that effect.

"It didn't take an amendment to get fully automatic weapons off the street."

There! Automatic weapons are not "off the street". You are either in error or you lied.

You saying that doesn't make it true. I'm surprised you would make such an obviously dumb remark. On second thought, I'm not that surprised.

About the only time assault weapons were used in a crime was the failed LA bank robbery.
They used AK-47s, that were fully automatic.
But anyone can easily convert most rifles or pistols to fully automatic if they want to.
It is not hard.
But almost no one wants to.
About the only case where anyone bothered was Pollard in Las Vegas, and he could not even see the individuals he was shooting.
Although it is odd that Beto attacks ARs, considering that they are likely the single hardest to make full auto.
The laws making full auto more expensive to own accomplished nothing.
No one intent on using a full auto weapon is at all going to be deterred by the minor additional penalty for having a full auto weapon illegally.
There just is no logic to the claims and they are "feel good" platitudes used by some to manipulate others.
I won't say "lie" because you likely believed what you wrote, but now that I have pointed out the truth, you should reconsider the lack of logic to your beliefs you got from others.
Then consider why others told you these claims in the first place?
Why would government want a monopoly on the means of empowering a democratic republic?

WTF does that mean? A monopoly on the means of empowering a democratic republic? You're full of shit.

 

[BULLDOG]

As I have no doubt that in your fantasy it ends with 3 day lines for toilet paper and starving peasants eating zoo Animals. But you nor any other Nazi here can explain just how you're going to pull this off? You're just going to tell the peasants to disarm and they'll be say "Yaza massa suh, we sho nuff gunna scrap and bow to ewe"

So you pass an unconstitutional law, then what?

How did they get fully auto weapons off the street?

They didn't. There are still fully automatic weapons on the street. It something you Nazis just can't grasp, criminals don't care much about the laws you pass, Otherwise you would just make a law against mass shootings and be done with it.

You can see it in the eyes of the anti-gun crowd. They rage about the mass shooting at hand and their vitriol is at the John Q. Public gun owner. They also have no problem with their liberal elite Hollywood gods putting out content after content of gun violence being glorified.

Big difference between a gun owner and a gun nut. They are not the same.

Not in the eyes of autocratic government that wants the general population to be unable to resist tyranny.
The fact police and military are given firearms is proof they are necessary.
And anyone who believes the government can be trusted with weapons more than the general public, is a traitor to the democratic republic.

Got it. You're another one of those anti-government gun nuts.

 

[regent]

Some of the most boring experiences I have ever encountered are a group of gun owners standing around and talking "guns". The life some must be living must be as boring as their gun conversations. Some are hard to avoid so I try to ooh and ah at the right times,

 

[Rigby5]

The fact that 32,000 Americans are killed by guns each year pisses us off. 20 six year olds killed at Sandy Hook pisses us off

The fact that you have to blatantly lie is proof of how weak the position of you fascists is.

Gun violence since 1980 is DOWN 32%. That's third less murders and robberies for you Marxists who are intellectually challenged.

11,208 Americans were murdered in 2017 using a firearm, a far cry from your ******* lie of 32,000. Of those, 10,741 were murdered by a handgun, meaning less than 500 by ANY type of rifle or shotgun. Those killed by the AR-15 you so blatantly lie about are less than 100, considering all the mass shootings as well.

Look, you have zero integrity, not a hint or shred - you are a sociopathic scumbag, a reprehensible pig with no honor. We get it. You are at war to end civil rights. All that is needed for pile of shit democrats to get away with lies is for good men not to post facts.

Gun violence in the United States - Wikipedia

Guess you are right

To make any real impact on gun violence, we need to go after handguns before AR15s

Well yes handguns would make a lot more sense than ARs, since ARs are hardly ever used in any sort of crime.
But you still are looking at this all wrong because firearms are used much more often to prevent crimes than they are used to successfully commit crimes. And those committing crimes with guns are not going to be deterred by the minor additional gun charge that gun control could impose. So any additional gun control will only reduce defensive guns with honest people, and not offensive guns used by dishonest people. It makes no sense, and it completely contradictory to the idea of a democratic republic, where individuals are supposed to be the source of all authority, rights, and powers.

 

[Rigby5]

How did they get fully auto weapons off the street?

They didn't. There are still fully automatic weapons on the street. It something you Nazis just can't grasp, criminals don't care much about the laws you pass, Otherwise you would just make a law against mass shootings and be done with it.

You can see it in the eyes of the anti-gun crowd. They rage about the mass shooting at hand and their vitriol is at the John Q. Public gun owner. They also have no problem with their liberal elite Hollywood gods putting out content after content of gun violence being glorified.

Big difference between a gun owner and a gun nut. They are not the same.

Not in the eyes of autocratic government that wants the general population to be unable to resist tyranny.
The fact police and military are given firearms is proof they are necessary.
And anyone who believes the government can be trusted with weapons more than the general public, is a traitor to the democratic republic.

Got it. You're another one of those anti-government gun nuts.

And is any sane or rational person "pro-government"?
Governments always tend towards corruption.
It was government that created slavery, Prohibition, the War on Drugs, the WMD lies about Iraq, etc.
Government may be better than without any government, but government is always something the people have to monitor and defense against its inherent corruption.

 

[Rigby5]

Some of the most boring experiences I have ever encountered are a group of gun owners standing around and talking "guns". The life some must be living must be as boring as their gun conversations. Some are hard to avoid so I try to ooh and ah at the right times,

Guns are the single most important invention of the last thousand years.
Guns are the equalizer that ended the dominance of the monarchies who controlled the mercenaries.
With firearms after 1500 or so, then any civilian could resist successfully against the thugs hired by the corrupt aristocracy.
It is firearms that allowed the US to exist as an independent and free country, instead of as a colonial vassal.

 

[Uncensored2008]

How did they get fully auto weapons off the street?

They didn't. There are still fully automatic weapons on the street. It something you Nazis just can't grasp, criminals don't care much about the laws you pass, Otherwise you would just make a law against mass shootings and be done with it.

You can see it in the eyes of the anti-gun crowd. They rage about the mass shooting at hand and their vitriol is at the John Q. Public gun owner. They also have no problem with their liberal elite Hollywood gods putting out content after content of gun violence being glorified.

Big difference between a gun owner and a gun nut. They are not the same.

Not in the eyes of autocratic government that wants the general population to be unable to resist tyranny.
The fact police and military are given firearms is proof they are necessary.
And anyone who believes the government can be trusted with weapons more than the general public, is a traitor to the democratic republic.

Got it. You're another one of those anti-government gun nuts.

Define "gun nut," Nazi?

 

[Rigby5]

That's funny! I can buy a fully automatic weapon at any number of gun stores in my local area. You are an idiot of the highest caliber!

You have now reached the credibility point of an idiot who argues that the world is flat. While there is a rout for an average person to own a fully automatic weapon, they are no where near as accessible as other types of guns. I'll leave you to your silly babbling now.

You said it was impossible or words to that effect. Failure!

Please point to the post where I said impossible, or words to that effect.

You said, "What possible reason would anyone have to do that? It didn't take an amendment to get fully automatic weapons off the street.."
That is not totally accurate.
Fully automatic weapons were cheap and available mail order after WWI, with Thompson machineguns going for less than $30, but almost no one wanted them. The only reason they became a problem was Prohibition, which caused large amounts of unprotected cash and turf wars. The problem was not Thompson machineguns, but that Prohibition of Alcohol was illegal and irrational.
While we then did pass laws to make machineguns more difficult to buy legally, they are still cheap and easy to obtain illegally, and the laws never had anything at all to do with their small number on the street. The reality is they are hard to conceal, so are almost never used in crime.
So your claim that laws succeeded with fully automatic weapons is just wrong.
And even more important is the fact that federal gun laws are also inherently illegal.
While people accepted them due to the bad media coverage of things like the St. Valentines day massacre, the reality is that no federal weapons law has ever been legal, they were never a good idea, and they never improved anything.
So in general your claim was wrong, that more federal laws helped in the past.
That is not accurate that federal laws helped, nor are things better now.
Weapons are supposed to be under state and local jurisdiction only.
It would be like the EU suddenly made strict gun laws in Europe, totally violating the sovereignty of countries like Switzerland that do not have strict gun laws.

4 quick takeaways from your post.
1. Asking for a possible reason is not the same as saying something is impossible. You are either just that dumb, or are tying to misdirect what was said.
2 You think a fully auto M16 is not as widespread in it's use by civilians as an ar15 because it is harder to conceal, even though they are basically the same gun, and indistinguishable from each other at a few feet.
3. You think all federal gun laws are unconstitutional. That's just ridiculous.
4. You're just another raving gun nut who will say anything, no matter how absurd, to defend your gun fetish.

1. Of course asking for a possible reason is not saying something is impossible. But your reading comprehension is awful. I am the one saying it is impossible to get fully automatic weapons off the street or to do just about anything with weapons just by passing more laws. The first thing I pointed out is that what got automatic weapons off the street was the end of Prohibition, and additional laws had NOTHING at all to do with it. Your claim that fully automatic weapons were removed from the street by laws short of a constitutional amendment is entirely and completely wrong. Almost no one ever wanted to have full auto on the streets, and it was only Prohibition that cause fully automatic weapons on the street at all.

2. You are claiming I said an M-16 is not as widespread as an AR-15 because it is harder to conceal, and that is nonsense. Clearly what I said is that almost NO ONE is using AR-15s or M-16s for crimes. They are using almost completely, pistols. That is because criminals usually do not want to need firepower, but instead do need and want concealability. It is foolish to target assault weapons in order to reduce crime, because they essentially are NOT used for crime hardly at all. That is very simple, clear, and easy to understand and anticipate. You should already know that ARs are not relevant to crime. So you really need to not only read better, but do more background research.

3. Of course all federal gun laws are obviously unconstitutional. The whole point of the Bill of Rights was to separate jurisdictions by limiting the federal government, so that states would sign onto the new federal Constitution. They would not do it until the Bill of Rights was added, specifically to forbid any federal over step. And the 2nd amendment strictly prohibits any and all federal weapons laws. It means only states and municipalities can legally draft any weapons law. Clearly laws always are intended to infringe. That is the purpose of laws. And clearly the 2nd amendment in the Bill of Rights then absolutely denies any federal weapons jurisdiction at all.

4. Guns are what ended the European monarchies and allowed democratic republics, like the American Revolution, the French Revolution, etc. If you like and want democratic republics, then you had also better start having a gun fetish. Because they are the only equalizer that allows democratic republics to exist at all.

 

[Rustic]

Don't need a car that goes 100mph either, but they make and sell them

And:

- heavily restrict where you can drive them
- restrict how fast you can drive them
- require written and performance tests for them
- register every sale and register every vehicle that leaves your property
- make you renew your license to operate them, requiring a relevant background check every time you renew

Yes, please, continue comparing cars and guns.

Owning a car is not a right.

Of course it is. Anyone can own a car. Operating one off of your private property, however,is regulated.

Furthermore, owning any and all guns and operating them where and how you like most certainly is not a right.

Lol
No one has an right to vehicle ownership you dumb ****...

 

[Rigby5]

You said it was impossible or words to that effect. Failure!

Please point to the post where I said impossible, or words to that effect.

"It didn't take an amendment to get fully automatic weapons off the street."

There! Automatic weapons are not "off the street". You are either in error or you lied.

You saying that doesn't make it true. I'm surprised you would make such an obviously dumb remark. On second thought, I'm not that surprised.

About the only time assault weapons were used in a crime was the failed LA bank robbery.
They used AK-47s, that were fully automatic.
But anyone can easily convert most rifles or pistols to fully automatic if they want to.
It is not hard.
But almost no one wants to.
About the only case where anyone bothered was Pollard in Las Vegas, and he could not even see the individuals he was shooting.
Although it is odd that Beto attacks ARs, considering that they are likely the single hardest to make full auto.
The laws making full auto more expensive to own accomplished nothing.
No one intent on using a full auto weapon is at all going to be deterred by the minor additional penalty for having a full auto weapon illegally.
There just is no logic to the claims and they are "feel good" platitudes used by some to manipulate others.
I won't say "lie" because you likely believed what you wrote, but now that I have pointed out the truth, you should reconsider the lack of logic to your beliefs you got from others.
Then consider why others told you these claims in the first place?
Why would government want a monopoly on the means of empowering a democratic republic?

WTF does that mean? A monopoly on the means of empowering a democratic republic? You're full of shit.

Whomever makes decisions is who has the power to enforce those decisions.
And if you allow a government to have a monopoly on that power, you then do not have a democratic republic.
You have an autocratic dictatorship.
It is simple science.
Whomever has the guns, is who makes all the decisions.
And the last people you want to have a monopoly on power is any government, ever.
To have a democratic republic, you must have an armed population.
Go read the founders a little and get back to us.

 

[Rustic]

He thinks it's a Military weapon. He knows nothing about it or guns in general. Would you hire someone to build your house that knows nothing about construction? What a ******* Dufus.

Beto went to school and can read...

What Is Different Between Ar15 Vs M4? - Daily Shooting | Shooting Tips And Reviews

But well done... My question is how many kids have to die before common sense gun laws come in?

Lol
The differences are like night and day between an over the counter Ar15 and an military grade m-4, barrel, gas chamber, ramps, trigger, select fire, bolt for staters Are of a vastly different grade.
You need to quit watching the main stream media and movies made by child molesting Hollywood types for your information you silly little ******.

More frivolous gun control laws will not say one single soul… Fact

 

[Rustic]

Don't need a car that goes 100mph either, but they make and sell them

And:

- heavily restrict where you can drive them
- restrict how fast you can drive them
- require written and performance tests for them
- register every sale and register every vehicle that leaves your property
- make you renew your license to operate them, requiring a relevant background check every time you renew

Yes, please, continue comparing cars and guns.

Which Amendment in the Bill of Rights covers driving cars?

Which amendment in the bill of rights covers buying long rifles without a universal background check, or mandatory registration?

None.

the 2nd.

you should read it

Wrong. Wow, been in a coma? That argument lost long ago. The 2nd amendment does not guarantee you a right to own any firearm, nor a right to do so without a universal background check.

In fact, I could ban every single gun except for musket loaders, enforce the right of anyone to own one, and the second amendment will not have been violated, as stated.

Lol
Have you always eaten shit for a living?

 

[Rustic]

Some of the most boring experiences I have ever encountered are a group of gun owners standing around and talking "guns". The life some must be living must be as boring as their gun conversations. Some are hard to avoid so I try to ooh and ah at the right times,

Lol
What do you and your fucked up friends converse?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

He thinks it's a Military weapon. He knows nothing about it or guns in general. Would you hire someone to build your house that knows nothing about construction? What a ******* Dufus.

Beto went to school and can read...

What Is Different Between Ar15 Vs M4? - Daily Shooting | Shooting Tips And Reviews

But well done... My question is how many kids have to die before common sense gun laws come in?

Lol
The differences are like night and day between an over the counter Ar15 and an military grade m-4, barrel, gas chamber, ramps, trigger, select fire, bolt for staters Are of a vastly different grade.
You need to quit watching the main stream media and movies made by child molesting Hollywood types for your information you silly little ******.

More frivolous gun control laws will not say one single soul… Fact

The only difference between an and a Military rifle is select fire and Mil-spec which doesn't make a military rifle better it just means it meet military specs. Plenty of civilian parts are way better than mil-spec.
The supreme court ruled that in order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment, it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, in common use of the time, and supplied by the citizen.
So tell me what firearm is there that is in common use that would have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia?

 

[Rustic]

He thinks it's a Military weapon. He knows nothing about it or guns in general. Would you hire someone to build your house that knows nothing about construction? What a ******* Dufus.

Beto went to school and can read...

What Is Different Between Ar15 Vs M4? - Daily Shooting | Shooting Tips And Reviews

But well done... My question is how many kids have to die before common sense gun laws come in?

Lol
The differences are like night and day between an over the counter Ar15 and an military grade m-4, barrel, gas chamber, ramps, trigger, select fire, bolt for staters Are of a vastly different grade.
You need to quit watching the main stream media and movies made by child molesting Hollywood types for your information you silly little ******.

More frivolous gun control laws will not say one single soul… Fact

The only difference between an and a Military rifle is select fire and Mil-spec which doesn't make a military rifle better it just means it meet military specs. Plenty of civilian parts are way better than mil-spec.
The supreme court ruled that in order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment, it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, in common use of the time, and supplied by the citizen.
So tell me what firearm is there that is in common use that would have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia?

Over the counter ARs like Smith M&Ps, Roger, Sig, Palmetto, Bushmasters, Remington’s, etc. are of a different grade as Daniel defense, LaRue, Bravo company, Noveske, LMT, etc.
Over the counter ARs don’t have m-4 ramps, Substandard gas chambers, substandard barrels, substandard triggers, and don’t have hardened bolts.
Hence the difference in price...

 

[BULLDOG]

You have now reached the credibility point of an idiot who argues that the world is flat. While there is a rout for an average person to own a fully automatic weapon, they are no where near as accessible as other types of guns. I'll leave you to your silly babbling now.

You said it was impossible or words to that effect. Failure!

Please point to the post where I said impossible, or words to that effect.

You said, "What possible reason would anyone have to do that? It didn't take an amendment to get fully automatic weapons off the street.."
That is not totally accurate.
Fully automatic weapons were cheap and available mail order after WWI, with Thompson machineguns going for less than $30, but almost no one wanted them. The only reason they became a problem was Prohibition, which caused large amounts of unprotected cash and turf wars. The problem was not Thompson machineguns, but that Prohibition of Alcohol was illegal and irrational.
While we then did pass laws to make machineguns more difficult to buy legally, they are still cheap and easy to obtain illegally, and the laws never had anything at all to do with their small number on the street. The reality is they are hard to conceal, so are almost never used in crime.
So your claim that laws succeeded with fully automatic weapons is just wrong.
And even more important is the fact that federal gun laws are also inherently illegal.
While people accepted them due to the bad media coverage of things like the St. Valentines day massacre, the reality is that no federal weapons law has ever been legal, they were never a good idea, and they never improved anything.
So in general your claim was wrong, that more federal laws helped in the past.
That is not accurate that federal laws helped, nor are things better now.
Weapons are supposed to be under state and local jurisdiction only.
It would be like the EU suddenly made strict gun laws in Europe, totally violating the sovereignty of countries like Switzerland that do not have strict gun laws.

4 quick takeaways from your post.
1. Asking for a possible reason is not the same as saying something is impossible. You are either just that dumb, or are tying to misdirect what was said.
2 You think a fully auto M16 is not as widespread in it's use by civilians as an ar15 because it is harder to conceal, even though they are basically the same gun, and indistinguishable from each other at a few feet.
3. You think all federal gun laws are unconstitutional. That's just ridiculous.
4. You're just another raving gun nut who will say anything, no matter how absurd, to defend your gun fetish.

1. Of course asking for a possible reason is not saying something is impossible. But your reading comprehension is awful. I am the one saying it is impossible to get fully automatic weapons off the street or to do just about anything with weapons just by passing more laws. The first thing I pointed out is that what got automatic weapons off the street was the end of Prohibition, and additional laws had NOTHING at all to do with it. Your claim that fully automatic weapons were removed from the street by laws short of a constitutional amendment is entirely and completely wrong. Almost no one ever wanted to have full auto on the streets, and it was only Prohibition that cause fully automatic weapons on the street at all.

2. You are claiming I said an M-16 is not as widespread as an AR-15 because it is harder to conceal, and that is nonsense. Clearly what I said is that almost NO ONE is using AR-15s or M-16s for crimes. They are using almost completely, pistols. That is because criminals usually do not want to need firepower, but instead do need and want concealability. It is foolish to target assault weapons in order to reduce crime, because they essentially are NOT used for crime hardly at all. That is very simple, clear, and easy to understand and anticipate. You should already know that ARs are not relevant to crime. So you really need to not only read better, but do more background research.

3. Of course all federal gun laws are obviously unconstitutional. The whole point of the Bill of Rights was to separate jurisdictions by limiting the federal government, so that states would sign onto the new federal Constitution. They would not do it until the Bill of Rights was added, specifically to forbid any federal over step. And the 2nd amendment strictly prohibits any and all federal weapons laws. It means only states and municipalities can legally draft any weapons law. Clearly laws always are intended to infringe. That is the purpose of laws. And clearly the 2nd amendment in the Bill of Rights then absolutely denies any federal weapons jurisdiction at all.

4. Guns are what ended the European monarchies and allowed democratic republics, like the American Revolution, the French Revolution, etc. If you like and want democratic republics, then you had also better start having a gun fetish. Because they are the only equalizer that allows democratic republics to exist at all.

Prohibition was about alcohol dumb ass. It wasn't about guns.

 

[SAYIT]

it's just funny we've gone from WE ARE NOT COMING FOR YOUR GUNS to HELL YEA WE'RE GONNA TAKE 'EM!!!

the ironic part is the anti-gun crowd started out thinking the AR15 was fully automatic. the media fed that ignorance 24x7. the anti-gunners eat it up cause they don't want to understand, they just want what they want. but unfortunately the more the anti-gunners learn, the more they just want all guns gone cause they can't define "assault rifle" outside their emotional force field.

when you debate the issue and ask how it's different, their frustration sets in and they just want all semi-automatic guns gone now.

but they're not coming for gun and just want "common sense" when that in fact is the last thing they have cause they refuse to learn, just broaden their definition and demands.

The left is exactly the same about socialism. First they deny they promote it, then they fudge the definition, then they say "hell yeah, we are socialists ... so what?"

Trump won Thursday's Dem debate before the first question was lobbed and has painted the Dems as gun-confiscating socialists.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

He thinks it's a Military weapon. He knows nothing about it or guns in general. Would you hire someone to build your house that knows nothing about construction? What a ******* Dufus.

Beto went to school and can read...

What Is Different Between Ar15 Vs M4? - Daily Shooting | Shooting Tips And Reviews

But well done... My question is how many kids have to die before common sense gun laws come in?

Lol
The differences are like night and day between an over the counter Ar15 and an military grade m-4, barrel, gas chamber, ramps, trigger, select fire, bolt for staters Are of a vastly different grade.
You need to quit watching the main stream media and movies made by child molesting Hollywood types for your information you silly little ******.

More frivolous gun control laws will not say one single soul… Fact

The only difference between an and a Military rifle is select fire and Mil-spec which doesn't make a military rifle better it just means it meet military specs. Plenty of civilian parts are way better than mil-spec.
The supreme court ruled that in order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment, it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, in common use of the time, and supplied by the citizen.
So tell me what firearm is there that is in common use that would have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia?

Over the counter ARs like Smith M&Ps, Roger, Sig, Palmetto, Bushmasters, Remington’s, etc. are of a different grade as Daniel defense, LaRue, Bravo company, Noveske, LMT, etc.
Over the counter ARs don’t have m-4 ramps, Substandard gas chambers, substandard barrels, substandard triggers, and don’t have hardened bolts.
Hence the difference in price...

I don't understand what you are saying because all AR15's parts are interchangeable
Del-Ton, Inc. AR-15 Flat Top Upper With M4 Feed Ramps (Complete)

• Forged 7075 T6 Aluminum
• A3 Flat Top with M4 Feed Ramps
• Hard Coat Anodized
• Mil-Spec
• Ejection Port Cover and Round Forward Assist
• Right Hand Ejection
• Bore's surface is coated with dry film lube, over the anodized surface

https://www.brownells.com/rifle-par...=Avantlink&utm_content=NA&utm_campaign=Itwine
The Brownells M16 5.56 Complete Bolt Carrier Group is constructed with a bolt made from 9310 steel, which is finished with a heat treatment and shot peening. The carrier is fabricated from 8620 hardened steel. Each element of the bolt-carrier group is finished in a black-nitride coating.

 

[BULLDOG]

They didn't. There are still fully automatic weapons on the street. It something you Nazis just can't grasp, criminals don't care much about the laws you pass, Otherwise you would just make a law against mass shootings and be done with it.

You can see it in the eyes of the anti-gun crowd. They rage about the mass shooting at hand and their vitriol is at the John Q. Public gun owner. They also have no problem with their liberal elite Hollywood gods putting out content after content of gun violence being glorified.

Big difference between a gun owner and a gun nut. They are not the same.

Not in the eyes of autocratic government that wants the general population to be unable to resist tyranny.
The fact police and military are given firearms is proof they are necessary.
And anyone who believes the government can be trusted with weapons more than the general public, is a traitor to the democratic republic.

Got it. You're another one of those anti-government gun nuts.

Define "gun nut," Nazi?

You. I would point to you as a shining example of a gun nut.