Time for Gun Safety Advocates to Abandon Their Strategy

[LuckyDuck]

The guy you responded to had it right. The proliferation of guns has to be reduced, a ban on further production would be great, then you can get to the rest of them without them being replenished.

We aren't giving them up. I served a career in the military because of our Constitution and its Bill of Rights, which includes the freedom of speech, the freedom of religion, the right to bear arms, et cetera.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Conservatives need to stop with the lies and slippery slope fallacies – guns aren’t going to be ‘banned,’ guns aren’t going to be ‘confiscated.’

I love irony.

Lying to us about what we KNOW your communist ilk plans, then telling us to stop lying.



LISTEN: We do not trust you one ******* scintilla. Get it?

YOU ARE NOT TRUSTWORTHY!!!

Get it?

So, when you say "guns aren’t going to be ‘banned,’ guns aren’t going to be ‘confiscated" we KNOW you are ******* lying.

Why?

Because you and your commie ilk tried to have the SCOTUS deem our right collective only. We have the Heller decision, thanks to you buttfuckers.

YOU ARE NOT TO BE TRUSTED!!!!

So, you flap your lips till the cows come home. We do not believe a goddamn word out of your filthy sewer, because YOU proved yourselves to be snakes.

So **** off. You are trying to ban and confiscate. We are not going to "compromise" a goddamn thing. I don't care how many people die.

NOT

ONE

*******

INCH

In fact, if anything, we are pushing to repeal ever goddamn gun law on earth, and we are willing to die for it. You?

 

[Stann]

We aren't giving them up. I served a career in the military because of our Constitution and its Bill of Rights, which includes the freedom of speech, the freedom of religion, the right to bear arms, et cetera.

I'm not talking about hunting guns just these crazy new military guns that the civilians should never have had in the first place. The ones designed for killing dozens of people in minutes.

 

[Stann]

I'm not talking about hunting guns just these crazy new military guns that the civilians should never have had in the first place. The ones designed for killing dozens of people in minutes.

I hope that 50 caliber m107 super rifle is never available to civilians. That's a game changer, and absolute weapon of incredible destructive power that should only be allowed in the military. Also 223/5.56 rounds, . 308-7.62 * 39 mm. And 300 blackout should all be banned from civilians as well as the armor piercing bullets it is only one reason someone will want those and it's not a good reason.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I hope that 50 caliber m107 super rifle is never available to civilians. That's a game changer, and absolute weapon of incredible destructive power that should only be allowed in the military. Also 223/5.56 rounds, . 308-7.62 * 39 mm. And 300 blackout should all be banned from civilians as well as the armor piercing bullets it is only one reason someone will want those and it's not a good reason.

Do you understand that those three rounds are intermediate-power rounds? Any round suitable for deer-hunting would be considerably more powerful than any of them.

 

[Stann]

Do you understand that those three rounds are intermediate-power rounds? Any round suitable for deer-hunting would be considerably more powerful than any of them.

Those were listed as the most explosive on impact, producing more Carnage. That is why they were isolated out.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Do you understand that those three rounds are intermediate-power rounds? Any round suitable for deer-hunting would be considerably more powerful than any of them.

Those were listed as the most explosive on impact, producing more Carnage. That is why they were isolated out.

What source “listed” them as such? Surely a source that is as ignorant about such things as you very obviously are.

And decent deer-hunting round would do a lot more damage to a human, than any of those three rounds would.

 

[Stann]

What source “listed” them as such? Surely a source that is as ignorant about such things as you very obviously are.

And decent deer-hunting round would do a lot more damage to a human, than any of those three rounds would.

I don't keep these articles, it was in the article that listed that that new gun that new rifle shouldn't be available to civilians because it's so lethal. You're amazed people own machine guns and drive around and tanks. That would be just as insane. I may not know much, well I know none of that would be good for anyone.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I don't keep these articles, it was in the article that listed that that new gun that new rifle shouldn't be available to civilians because it's so lethal. You're amazed people own machine guns and drive around and tanks. That would be just as insane. I may not know much, well I know none of that would be good for anyone.

In other words, you're just making up bullshit, without any source.

In other words, lying.

There was no article, which is why you cannot now cite it.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I don't keep these articles, it was in the article that listed that that new gun that new rifle shouldn't be available to civilians because it's so lethal. You're amazed people own machine guns and drive around and tanks. That would be just as insane. I may not know much, well I know none of that would be good for anyone.

An average deer rifle does twice to 3x the damage of a .223/5.56 or a 7.62x39.

300 Blackout is a subsonic round, so it does less damage than any of those and probably less than a 9mm.

308-7.62 * 39 mm

.308 = 7.62 x 51 not x 39 (which is the AK47 round)

7.62x39

you're uninformed.

 

[Stann]

In other words, you're just making up bullshit, without any source.

In other words, lying.

There was no article, which is why you cannot now cite it.

No I'm not really into all this garbage like you people are. It is a sickness, I don't want to get into it that much. It is all a part of our barbaric past that needs to die out for mankind to advance to the next level.

 

[LuckyDuck]

I'm not talking about hunting guns just these crazy new military guns that the civilians should never have had in the first place. The ones designed for killing dozens of people in minutes.

Newsflash the AR-15 style rifles are NOT military firearms. A military rifle in use by the United States is the M16. It can be switched from semi-automatic to fire in short bursts. The AR-15 rifles cannot do this. They remain semi-automatic rifles firing one shot each time the trigger is pulled. Law-abiding owners of these "civilian rifles," do use these rifles for hunting and they have been used successfully against home-invasions done by multiple individuals at once.
The ignorant layperson needs to understand why the Founding Fathers created the Second Amendment, and it wasn't for hunting. They saw the value of private citizens forming militias to defend their states, which aided in our winning the war against the strongest military in the 1700's.
Thus, they said that the right of the people to "keep and bear arms" was paramount to aiding in the defense of their states from a tyrannical government, whether tyrannical government is foreign or domestic.
The current feeble-minded president said that the civilian couldn't win a war against our government, as the government has rockets, missiles, tanks, artillery, fighter jets and bombers, if the government were to go up against the populace, apparently he is unaware that we were involved in a war for 20 years against a determined population armed only with AK-47's, AK-74's, RPG's and Improvised Explosive Devices, while dressed in the equivalent of pajamas, sandals and cloth headwear......and...... they won. They just wore the US military with all of its fancy military might, down.

 

[Stann]

Newsflash the AR-15 style rifles are NOT military firearms. A military rifle in use by the United States is the M16. It can be switched from semi-automatic to fire in short bursts. The AR-15 rifles cannot do this. They remain semi-automatic rifles firing one shot each time the trigger is pulled. Law-abiding owners of these "civilian rifles," do use these rifles for hunting and they have been used successfully against home-invasions done by multiple individuals at once.
The ignorant layperson needs to understand why the Founding Fathers created the Second Amendment, and it wasn't for hunting. They saw the value of private citizens forming militias to defend their states, which aided in our winning the war against the strongest military in the 1700's.
Thus, they said that the right of the people to "keep and bear arms" was paramount to aiding in the defense of their states from a tyrannical government, whether tyrannical government is foreign or domestic.
The current feeble-minded president said that the civilian couldn't win a war against our government, as the government has rockets, missiles, tanks, artillery, fighter jets and bombers, if the government were to go up against the populace, apparently he is unaware that we were involved in a war for 20 years against a determined population armed only with AK-47's, AK-74's, RPG's and Improvised Explosive Devices, while dressed in the equivalent of pajamas, sandals and cloth headwear......and...... they won. They just wore the US military with all of its fancy military might, down.

Whatever, if the founding fathers were alive today and they could see what is going on in this country, they were disarm all American citizens. They did it before when there was only a threat of violence. They would definitely do it when there's such a great problem with it.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Whatever, if the founding fathers were alive today and they could see what is going on in this country, they were disarm all American citizens. They did it before when there was only a threat of violence. They would definitely do it when there's such a great problem with it.

You most certainly do not speak for any of the great men who founded this country or wrote our Constitution. Any of them would surely consider you an embarrassment to this nation.

 

[Stann]

You most certainly do not speak for any of the great men who founded this country or wrote our Constitution. Any of them would surely consider you an embarrassment to this nation.

Which shows how little you know about our history. And the second amendment.. it's amazing how much ignorance and arrogance there is surrounding it.

 

[2aguy]

I'm not talking about hunting guns just these crazy new military guns that the civilians should never have had in the first place. The ones designed for killing dozens of people in minutes.

New? Semi-automatic rifles go back at least to 1907 when winchester created a magazine fed semi-automatic rifle....the AR-15 is no different, in way, from that rifle.....

Can you answer this question...show us your chops......is the AR-15 a military weapon?

Yes or no.

 

[2aguy]

Whatever, if the founding fathers were alive today and they could see what is going on in this country, they were disarm all American citizens. They did it before when there was only a threat of violence. They would definitely do it when there's such a great problem with it.

No...dipshit.....if the Founding Fathers saw the way the Europeans disarmed their citizens in the 1920s, and they, by 1935 began the process of murdering 15 million innocent men, women and children, they would have declared, in the Bill of Rights, that all homes have two or more actual military rifles with several hundred rounds of ammunition....to start..........

Then, seeing the close to 200 million people murdered by the socialists around the world, they would have doubled both....

 

[Stann]

New? Semi-automatic rifles go back at least to 1907 when winchester created a magazine fed semi-automatic rifle....the AR-15 is no different, in way, from that rifle.....

Can you answer this question...show us your chops......is the AR-15 a military weapon?

Yes or no.

The ArmaLite ( AR-15 ) was designed in 1956 for the military. Source Wikipedia.

 

[2aguy]

The ArmaLite ( AR-15 ) was designed in 1956 for the military. Source Wikipedia.

Wrong...dipshit.......the original patent...


When it is first sold to civilians....it is a civilian rifle...it was on the Civilian market for two years....before the military changed its design...


The FOIA request itself was prompted from a Nov. 2017 article in The Atlantic in which the magazine, unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with its anti-gun bent, attempted to bolster a claim that “these rifles were meant for the military, not civilians.”

“Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963. It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the ‘Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle’ began on Jan 2, 1964,” one critic of the article contended.


“The M16 wasn’t issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn’t standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn’t officially replace the M14 until 1969.”




Original ATF AR-15 Classification Refutes Claim that Rifle ‘Not Meant’ for Civilians

 

[Stann]

Wrong...dipshit.......the original patent...


When it is first sold to civilians....it is a civilian rifle...it was on the Civilian market for two years....before the military changed its design...


The FOIA request itself was prompted from a Nov. 2017 article in The Atlantic in which the magazine, unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with its anti-gun bent, attempted to bolster a claim that “these rifles were meant for the military, not civilians.”

“Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963. It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the ‘Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle’ began on Jan 2, 1964,” one critic of the article contended.


“The M16 wasn’t issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn’t standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn’t officially replace the M14 until 1969.”





Original ATF AR-15 Classification Refutes Claim that Rifle ‘Not Meant’ for Civilians

What part of assault rifle do you not understand. The intent of the manufacturer was to sell it to the military.