When anti-gunners lie about the AR-15 rifle, or just get it completely wrong..

[JoeB131]

pathetic.

look in some of those books you were touting. you'll find the answers.

(try some without the pictures)

by the way, maroon, if they were so expensive, why did a majority of farmers and 'hillbillies' have firearms?

They didn't.

Nowhere near that.

They were too expensive and not terribly useful.

 

[Hafar1014]

They didn't.

Nowhere near that.

They were too expensive and not terribly useful.

The most dangerous gun is a 12 gauge shotgun not a civilian AR

 

[JoeB131]

The most dangerous gun is a 12 gauge shotgun not a civilian AR

Then why doesn't the army go to war with shotguns?

 

[hadit]

No, when the Founding Slave Rapists wrote that, guns were prohibitively expensive, which is why they didn't think the rabble would have them.

They certainly didn't want the slaves and indentured servants to have them.

Guns were only militarily useful when fired in volleys.


Really, then why are they called "Nuclear Arms"?

When the 1st was written, no one envisioned you being able to broadcast your poisonous opinions literally around the world in seconds, viewable by almost everyone on the planet. To be protected by it, you must submit your opinion in written form on a piece of parchment paper, written by a quill pen and delivered to a newspaper on horseback.

Clearly, the 1st allows government to strictly control what you are allowed to say on the internet.

 

[Hafar1014]

Then why doesn't the army go to war with shotguns?

They do its a great close range weapon extremely deadly.

 

[hadit]

Then why doesn't the army go to war with shotguns?

They do use shotguns.

 

[martybegan]

False the 2nd amendment applies to individuals as the SC ruled in Heller

That's what I am saying.

The first part says the States can keep their militias. The fear was the federal government would take the right to an "army" away from the States.

The 2nd part says the people keep the right to keep and bear arms.

So yes, the 2nd IS about militias, but only the first part. The 2nd part is about the people's right to arms.

 

[Auld Phart]

They didn't.

Nowhere near that.

They were too expensive and not terribly useful.

The American Revolution against British Gun Control

British gun confiscation caused the American Revolution

davekopel.org

"The Royal Governor of Massachusetts, General Thomas Gage, had forbidden town meetings from taking place more than once a year. When he dispatched the Redcoats to break up an illegal town meeting in Salem, 3000 armed Americans appeared in response, and the British retreated. Gage's aide John Andrews explained that everyone in the area aged 16 years or older owned a gun and plenty of gunpowder.

Military rule would be difficult to impose on an armed populace. Gage had only 2,000 troops in Boston. There were thousands of armed men in Boston alone, and more in the surrounding area. One response to the problem was to deprive the Americans of gunpowder"

 

[Hafar1014]

That's what I am saying.

The first part says the States can keep their militias. The fear was the federal government would take the right to an "army" away from the States.

The 2nd part says the people keep the right to keep and bear arms.

So yes, the 2nd IS about militias, but only the first part. The 2nd part is about the people's right to arms.

The SC ruled its an individual right

 

[JoeB131]

They do its a great close range weapon extremely deadly.

yet most mass shooters use AR-15s, not shotguns.

"The Royal Governor of Massachusetts, General Thomas Gage, had forbidden town meetings from taking place more than once a year. When he dispatched the Redcoats to break up an illegal town meeting in Salem, 3000 armed Americans appeared in response, and the British retreated. Gage's aide John Andrews explained that everyone in the area aged 16 years or older owned a gun and plenty of gunpowder.

More gun nutter revisionist history.

 

[martybegan]

The SC ruled its an individual right

As per the 2nd part, which gives people the RKBA.

It can say both. The anti 2nd amendment people argue it's ONLY about militias.

 

[Auld Phart]

yet most mass shooters use AR-15s, not shotguns.



More gun nutter revisionist history.

seems YOURS is the revisionist history.


(and most mass shooters use handguns)

 

[JoeB131]

They do use shotguns.

I was in for 11 years. My primary MOS was 76Y, which meant I was i charge of the arms vault for an infantry unit.

Never saw a shotgun. Not once.

 

[hadit]

yet most mass shooters use AR-15s, not shotguns.



More gun nutter revisionist history.

Actually, mass shooters use handguns more than anything else.

 

[JoeB131]

As per the 2nd part, which gives people the RKBA.

It can say both. The anti 2nd amendment people argue it's ONLY about militias.

So we should all live with Madmen weilding military grade weapons because a bunch of slave-rapists who shit in chamber pots couldn't clearly define a militia.

Got it.

Makes sense to me.

Of course, back in the day, only the affluent could afford guns, and the insane were institutionalized.

 

[hadit]

I was in for 11 years. My primary MOS was 76Y, which meant I was i charge of the arms vault for an infantry unit.

Never saw a shotgun. Not once.

Oh, that's definitive. Did you cover urban warfare, breaching doors, etc.? How about riot control? Did you supply MP's? You know, areas where shotguns are very effective and useful.

 

[martybegan]

So we should all live with Madmen weilding military grade weapons because a bunch of slave-rapists who shit in chamber pots couldn't clearly define a militia.

Got it.

Makes sense to me.

Of course, back in the day, only the affluent could afford guns, and the insane were institutionalized.

Or the madmen can just take their car and drive into a crowd and accomplish the same thing.

 

[JoeB131]

Or the madmen can just take their car and drive into a crowd and accomplish the same thing.

yet we rarely hear about that, as opposed to 600 mass shootings a year.

 

[martybegan]

yet we rarely hear about that, as opposed to 600 mass shootings a year.

If you could theoretically get rid of the guns, what's from stopping them from moving onto the vehicles?

 

[Hafar1014]

yet most mass shooters use AR-15s, not shotguns.



More gun nutter revisionist history.

They can use a car would you ban that