The Left is Correct about 'Assault Rifles'

[johnwk]

The basic argument of the Left, that 'assault rifles' are not necessary for personal defense, is correct.

I’m sure Fidel Castro would have agreed with you, see:​

Fidel Castro’s “common sense” gun control pitch ​

JWK

Our Founders intended ordinary citizens to keep and bear arms [a contemporary fire arm used by foot soldiers] so they would be ready and able to defend themselves against a despotic government if necessary. The AR-15-semi is a civilian version of the United States military’s M16 and ought to be kept by ordinary citizens to defend against a tyrannical government if necessary. Forewarned is forearmed.

 

[Doug1943]

I’m sure Fidel Castro would have agreed with you, see:​

Fidel Castro’s “common sense” gun control pitch​

JWK

Our Founders intended ordinary citizens to keep and bear arms [a contemporary fire arm used by foot soldiers] so they would be ready and able to defend themselves against a despotic government if necessary. The AR-15-semi is a civilian version of the United States military’s M16 and ought to be kept by ordinary citizens to defend against a tyrannical government if necessary. Forewarned is forearmed.

Please read the whole post. I'm entirely in favor of widespread (among patriots) ownership of AR15s. But unless we are organized, we will be at huge disadvantage facing an organized state.

And part of that organization must be having the closest possible relationship with the military -- actual membership if possible, membership in the State Guard, if possible, and contact in other ways, such as the USO, if possible.

It's not really on topic, but for those interested in Cuba, you should sign up (it's free) for the Havana Times, here:
[ Havana Times ]

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just more white noise bullshit.
Assault rifles, according to FBI statistics, account for less than 3% of gun deaths.
Shotguns about 1%
All the rest are handguns.

The left doesn't get that. Mass murders (which are 4 people or more) that died at the hands of somebody with an AR are sensationalized by the media since they are nothing more than an extension of the Democrat party.

 

[rightwinger]

And there are people who have hated that from the beginning and want to change one small law, ordinance and mandate at a time. They have no choice to do it that way, but they have alot of advances in their agenda over the years. That really needs to be nipped in the bud. Problem is, the bud is getting pretty big

You rarely get massive change in society

 

[BothWings]

You rarely get massive change in society

Because a slow drip doesn't attract so much attention or backlash

 

[rightwinger]

Just more white noise bullshit.
Assault rifles, according to FBI statistics, account for less than 3% of gun deaths.
Shotguns about 1%
All the rest are handguns.

Very true

Getting rid of handguns would make the biggest difference in gun deaths. But that ain’t going to happen.

Getting rid of assault rifles will help end the fad of young white males taking their AR-15 and seeing how many people they can slaughter

 

[rightwinger]

The left doesn't get that. Mass murders (which are 4 people or more) that died at the hands of somebody with an AR are sensationalized by the media since they are nothing more than an extension of the Democrat party.

You forgot to say Commie

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Very true

Getting rid of handguns would make the biggest difference in gun deaths. But that ain’t going to happen.

Getting rid of assault rifles will help end the fad of young white males taking their AR-15 and seeing how many people they can slaughter

I think it would be more important to deal with the reasons culturally that caused the breakdown of society in these areas and save 1000s of lives every year.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The left doesn't get that. Mass murders (which are 4 people or more) that died at the hands of somebody with an AR are sensationalized by the media since they are nothing more than an extension of the Democrat party.

And the fact they do nothing to address WHY so many crimes ALL happen in tiny subsets of the whole city.

 

[rightwinger]

I think it would be more important to deal with the reasons culturally that caused the breakdown of society in these areas and save 1000s of lives every year.

We have always been a gun loving society and guns feature prominently in many gun owners fantasies.

Some fantasize about using their guns to fight off bad guys
Some fantasize about repelling invaders
Some fantasize about taking their gun and going out in a blaze of glory

Some act on their fantasies

 

[iamwhatiseem]

We have always been a gun loving society and guns feature prominently in many gun owners fantasies.

Some fantasize about using their guns to fight off bad guys
Some fantasize about repelling invaders
Some fantasize about taking their gun and going out in a blaze of glory

Some act on their fantasies

You always dance around the real problem like this?
The problem isn't guns. Never has been.
The problems are cultural and social. But I understand why you don't want to talk about 98% of the crimes, and instead concentrate on the 3% because you know...

 

[rightwinger]

You always dance around the real problem like this?
The problem isn't guns. Never has been.
The problems are cultural and social. But I understand why you don't want to talk about 98% of the crimes, and instead concentrate on the 3% because you know...

There is also the problem of 350 million guns in circulation
They become a way to settle our differences

Other societies have no where near the number of guns we do and one fifth the murder rate

 

[iamwhatiseem]

There is also the problem of 350 million guns in circulation
They become a way to settle our differences

Other societies have no where near the number of guns we do and one fifth the murder rate

Other societies didn't employ social policies that packed "certain sets" of the population in like sardines away from their neighborhoods and job markets... handed them just enough money to barely get by to ensure they stay there... and then not want to talk about that being the largest reason why they are still there and involved in so much crime.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There is also the problem of 350 million guns in circulation
They become a way to settle our differences

Other societies have no where near the number of guns we do and one fifth the murder rate

It's not the guns that are the problem. It's people that are the problem.

You can't compare nearly single culture societies with a multicultural society like ours. People of color are much more violent than whites, and it doesn't matter if you have one gun or 500 million.

In other words you take a nice safe white middle-class suburb, make a law that every household must possess a firearm, their crime statistics will not change. At the same time, go to a high crime minority city, make a law that bans all guns, their crime rate won't change either.

So it's not the guns or amount of them. It's the people.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Very true

Getting rid of handguns would make the biggest difference in gun deaths. But that ain’t going to happen.

Getting rid of assault rifles will help end the fad of young white males taking their AR-15 and seeing how many people they can slaughter

Getting rid of guns will produce more gun deaths because it would give us a society where only the criminals and police have the guns. We would all be victims of those armed criminals.

Do this: Get a huge sign made that says THIS HOUSEHOLD HAS NO FIREARMS and put that on your front porch. Get back to us in a few months (if you're still here) and let us know how that worked out for you. Because you see, by disarming law abiding citizens, that's exactly what you'd be doing, hanging a big sign out on your front porch telling criminals you have no way to defend yourself against an armed criminal.

 

[rightwinger]

Do this: Get a huge sign made that says THIS HOUSEHOLD HAS NO FIREARMS and put that on your front porch. Get back to us in a few months (if you're still here) and let us know how that worked out for you.

You gun nuts keep making that claim thinking it is somehow profound.

Reality is……Yes, I am willing to put out a sign saying there are no guns in the home and I will sleep soundly at night.

You put up a sign indicating your home has guns and you are more likely to be robbed.

I have little in my house that a thief can turn around and sell.
Your guns are easily marketable.

 

[munkle]

History proves time and time again......
A well armed society has a "well behaved" government...and when it misbehaves, those armed citizens can do their job

The "Point" of an AR-15 is to give the citizens some chance against tyrannical forces that may be better equipped, but would be hopelessly and vastly outnumbered. Remember that the US' superior capabilities still didn't prevail against a far lesser enemy in Vietnam and other conflicts.
Now given that government troops would be killing their own citizens on their own home land, the probability of collateral damage in terms of also killing government friendly citizens makes their task many times more difficult than Vietnam etc.
IF (a big if) enough American citizens decided enough is enough and were willing to defend their liberty, the government would have a hell of a hard time stopping them. Far harder than you might think. Factor in that many with access to advanced military weapons and vehicles might use them against the government.

Also, factor in China and Russia would likely use that time to attack targets that America has sworn to defend forcing military assets to be used overseas and against foreign attackers at the same time. I personally do not believe the government could pull it off and would be fractured to the point of being easily dismantled by Patriots at that point. Their ONLY chance government has is tricking citizens into willingly give up their arms through threats like taking away things and threats of prosecution. And that is precisely what the government is doing right now.

The US is entering a stage where government has become corrupted and tyrannical.
The most significant sign of this is it's current hard core push to disarm the citizens.

Right now, today is by far the most critical time in American history since 1776 that Americans must not give up their AR-15's or any weapons to government threats.

^^^ This 100%. The truth is in defending your home if you are fighting inside your last refuge close enough for a handgun or a shotgun, you have already lost. Tyrannical regime forces must be stopped before they ever get near where you sleep. That means fighting holes on your property and in the woods, and on rooftops. The Founders said nothing about hunting in 2A. A well-armed people is a free people.

Evidence of tyranny is the simple fact that half the mass shootings are false flags, with holes in the story big enough to run a Mack truck through. Then legislation magically appears as if was already written up. They are willing to kill us to ram their agenda.

Case in point Las Vegas. Any Afghanistan combat vet knows the sound of a fully automatic belt-fed weapon. That's what we heard, not bumpfired AR. That is a joke.

Stormtroopers are not afraid of pistols and shotguns, which they can manage by staying out of range while they pour fire into your wooden structure. But they ARE afraid of ARs, which can punch right through many body armors.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You gun nuts keep making that claim thinking it is somehow profound.

Reality is……Yes, I am willing to put out a sign saying there are no guns in the home and I will sleep soundly at night.

You put up a sign indicating your home has guns and you are more likely to be robbed.

I have little in my house that a thief can turn around and sell.
Your guns are easily marketable.

The idea of an armed society is that the criminal has no idea whether we are armed or not. That's the beauty of it.

I was in a local blog (Topix) when our CCW laws were in consideration. An adversary of mine asked why I wanted to see such a law passed? I told him my mother lives alone, never had a drivers license in her life, and loves walking everywhere she can. He then asked if our CCW laws passed, would my elderly mother carry a gun with her? To that I replied no she wouldn't, but the criminal doesn't know that.

Mass shootings often happen in gun free zones. Why is that? Because the criminal wants to shoot as many people as possible with no resistance. Criminals are very concerned about armed citizens and with good reason. In the US, we use our guns over a million times a year for self-defense or to stop a crime. A disarmed society couldn't provide such a deterrent. That's why when more states adopted CCW laws since the mid 90's, and laws that protect the victim instead of the criminal, gun crime decreased, again, disproving your theory that more guns are the problem when in fact if anything, they are more of a solution.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Very true

Getting rid of handguns would make the biggest difference in gun deaths. But that ain’t going to happen.

Getting rid of assault rifles will help end the fad of young white males taking their AR-15 and seeing how many people they can slaughter

So you're for confiscation. Good to know.

 

[rightwinger]

So you're for confiscation. Good to know.

Only certain weapons