Why Liberals Want To Ban The AR-15

[M14 Shooter]

The Ar-15 was not designed for civilian use

Funny, then, how Colt did just that

- there is no reasonable justification for civilians to have one.

AR15s are in common use for all of the traditionally legal purposes for a firearm - how can you be right?

The AR-15 falls under the category of "any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose"

The fact they are in common use for all of the traditionally legal purposes for a firearm says otherwise.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The civilian Colt AR-15 was marketed starting in 1977.

1963.
Please stop making things up.

 

[M14 Shooter]

and that's why it's protected by the second amendment

No it's not. It was banned from 1994 - 2004.

Yeah.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What well-regulated militia are you a member of?

How are you unaware of the fact The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home?

 

[Rustic]

and that's why it's protected by the second amendment

No it's not. It was banned from 1994 - 2004.

Yeah.


View attachment 289297

Yep,
Like I’ve always said all progressives are all kinds of fucked up

 

[M14 Shooter]

Miller held that regulating machine guns was Constitutional

This is a lie.
Disagree? Quote the text.
You won't... because you know you cannot.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Tell that to the parents of all those kids killed in school shootings
Tell it to the families of the 500 shot at the Vegas concert.

Rational, reasoned people are not swayed by fallacious appeals to emotion.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

***\\\This Is My Opinion///***

I believe Liberals want to ban the AR-15 for two reasons...

1. The AR-15 is scary looking, it's that simple. The AR-15 is scary looking and it's easy to get people to think the AR-15 is bad because of the way it looks.

2. Here's the main reason why Liberals want to ban the AR-15. If Liberals are successful, they can then point to other guns as more powerful and say "We banned the AR-15 so we should ban all of these other weapons because they are more powerful and accurate."

That's why the big push to ban the AR-15.

The left wants to ban not only AR-15's, AK-47's and similar types, not because they look scary, the left looks at countries which banned firearms for the public in general (Soviet Union, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, China, et cetera) and sees that once the public is disarmed, they are no longer a threat to the government, once the oppressive laws are implemented. What we are seeing is the rise of a potential oppressive/tyrannical government and the only solution may be civil war.

What WE are seeing is the gunnutters are still trying to play the old Fear Game. Hate to break it to you but people are more afraid of losing their children to nutcases with "Legal" ARs than they are about whether you can have all the dangerous toys you want to play with.

Your whole thing is nothing but a Circus Act with a dog and pony. Get new materiel.

Lol
You do realize the chance of anyone being killed by someone using an AR is next to zero percentage wise?
Shut the **** up

You don't have a message other than, "Buy My Guns and Ammo" so I think I won't contribute to your sales pitch anymore. Time to give you a very long time out, child.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Tell that to the parents of all those kids killed in school shootings

Tell it to the families of the 500 shot at the Vegas concert.

Neither the gun itself nor the type of gun made any difference in those shootings. The same nuts could find a litany of ways to cause the same carnage. A sane person with a gun could also stop the carnage much quicker, but anti-gun nuts oppose that too.

You mean like El Paso? There were tons of guns there. Comon, it's Texas for crying out loud. They were too busy ducking and covering to pull their weapons. But it took the cops less than a minute to bring him down. Had it been allowed to go for a couple of minutes, the choice of weapon would have been devastating. Or if he had continued to fire even after contested. Having sillyvillians with guns doesn't make it better. Remember the one where the good guy was shot by the cop? The cop gets there after it's started and only sees a person with a gun.

Yes, there are videos out there that tells you what to do but gimme' a break. Humans aren't wired that way. Training is to get us to do something we normally won't do in real life.

 

[SweetTea]

Tell that to the parents of all those kids killed in school shootings

Tell it to the families of the 500 shot at the Vegas concert.

Neither the gun itself nor the type of gun made any difference in those shootings. The same nuts could find a litany of ways to cause the same carnage. A sane person with a gun could also stop the carnage much quicker, but anti-gun nuts oppose that too.

You mean like El Paso? There were tons of guns there. Comon, it's Texas for crying out loud. They were too busy ducking and covering to pull their weapons. But it took the cops less than a minute to bring him down. Had it been allowed to go for a couple of minutes, the choice of weapon would have been devastating. Or if he had continued to fire even after contested. Having sillyvillians with guns doesn't make it better. Remember the one where the good guy was shot by the cop? The cop gets there after it's started and only sees a person with a gun.

Yes, there are videos out there that tells you what to do but gimme' a break. Humans aren't wired that way. Training is to get us to do something we normally won't do in real life.

What did he do that he could not have done with a few semi-automatic pistols?

 

[SweetTea]

***\\\This Is My Opinion///***

I believe Liberals want to ban the AR-15 for two reasons...

1. The AR-15 is scary looking, it's that simple. The AR-15 is scary looking and it's easy to get people to think the AR-15 is bad because of the way it looks.

2. Here's the main reason why Liberals want to ban the AR-15. If Liberals are successful, they can then point to other guns as more powerful and say "We banned the AR-15 so we should ban all of these other weapons because they are more powerful and accurate."

That's why the big push to ban the AR-15.

The left wants to ban not only AR-15's, AK-47's and similar types, not because they look scary, the left looks at countries which banned firearms for the public in general (Soviet Union, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, China, et cetera) and sees that once the public is disarmed, they are no longer a threat to the government, once the oppressive laws are implemented. What we are seeing is the rise of a potential oppressive/tyrannical government and the only solution may be civil war.

No one seeks to ‘ban’ guns or ‘disarm’ civilians.

You can't possibly be so naive to believe this.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Tell that to the parents of all those kids killed in school shootings

Tell it to the families of the 500 shot at the Vegas concert.

Neither the gun itself nor the type of gun made any difference in those shootings. The same nuts could find a litany of ways to cause the same carnage. A sane person with a gun could also stop the carnage much quicker, but anti-gun nuts oppose that too.

You mean like El Paso? There were tons of guns there. Comon, it's Texas for crying out loud. They were too busy ducking and covering to pull their weapons. But it took the cops less than a minute to bring him down. Had it been allowed to go for a couple of minutes, the choice of weapon would have been devastating. Or if he had continued to fire even after contested. Having sillyvillians with guns doesn't make it better. Remember the one where the good guy was shot by the cop? The cop gets there after it's started and only sees a person with a gun.

Yes, there are videos out there that tells you what to do but gimme' a break. Humans aren't wired that way. Training is to get us to do something we normally won't do in real life.

What did he do that he could not have done with a few semi-automatic pistols?

More of the dog and pony act. I would have to have a whole bunch of handguns on ropes hung around my neck to come up with the firepower of just one AR. It would be a ***** just to get through the doors or run or walk fast or ......... You wouldn't reload the handgun, you would drop it and grab the next one in order to stay with the reload speed of the AR. And the number of rounds in a 18 shot handgun versus 4 or 5 AR 30 round Mags means that you will need how many handguns? I'll let you do the math on this one. You brought the wrong tool bag.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

***\\\This Is My Opinion///***

I believe Liberals want to ban the AR-15 for two reasons...

1. The AR-15 is scary looking, it's that simple. The AR-15 is scary looking and it's easy to get people to think the AR-15 is bad because of the way it looks.

2. Here's the main reason why Liberals want to ban the AR-15. If Liberals are successful, they can then point to other guns as more powerful and say "We banned the AR-15 so we should ban all of these other weapons because they are more powerful and accurate."

That's why the big push to ban the AR-15.

The left wants to ban not only AR-15's, AK-47's and similar types, not because they look scary, the left looks at countries which banned firearms for the public in general (Soviet Union, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, China, et cetera) and sees that once the public is disarmed, they are no longer a threat to the government, once the oppressive laws are implemented. What we are seeing is the rise of a potential oppressive/tyrannical government and the only solution may be civil war.

No one seeks to ‘ban’ guns or ‘disarm’ civilians.

You can't possibly be so naive to believe this.

The title to this thread is misleading. Many Moderates and Conservatives wish to ban or heavily regulate the AR-15 as well. You don't have to be a Rightwingnutjob to be a conservative anymore than you have to be a leftwingnutjob to be a liberal. If that is the message you are receiving then, as Jeff Foxworthy might say, "You may be a wingnutjob".

 

[Rustic]

***\\\This Is My Opinion///***

I believe Liberals want to ban the AR-15 for two reasons...

1. The AR-15 is scary looking, it's that simple. The AR-15 is scary looking and it's easy to get people to think the AR-15 is bad because of the way it looks.

2. Here's the main reason why Liberals want to ban the AR-15. If Liberals are successful, they can then point to other guns as more powerful and say "We banned the AR-15 so we should ban all of these other weapons because they are more powerful and accurate."

That's why the big push to ban the AR-15.

The left wants to ban not only AR-15's, AK-47's and similar types, not because they look scary, the left looks at countries which banned firearms for the public in general (Soviet Union, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, China, et cetera) and sees that once the public is disarmed, they are no longer a threat to the government, once the oppressive laws are implemented. What we are seeing is the rise of a potential oppressive/tyrannical government and the only solution may be civil war.

What WE are seeing is the gunnutters are still trying to play the old Fear Game. Hate to break it to you but people are more afraid of losing their children to nutcases with "Legal" ARs than they are about whether you can have all the dangerous toys you want to play with.

Your whole thing is nothing but a Circus Act with a dog and pony. Get new materiel.

Lol
You do realize the chance of anyone being killed by someone using an AR is next to zero percentage wise?
Shut the **** up

You don't have a message other than, "Buy My Guns and Ammo" so I think I won't contribute to your sales pitch anymore. Time to give you a very long time out, child.

Lol
I accept your defeat... The fact remains more people are killed by lawnmowers than people using ARs to kill other people… That is a fact

 

[Rustic]

Tell that to the parents of all those kids killed in school shootings

Tell it to the families of the 500 shot at the Vegas concert.

Neither the gun itself nor the type of gun made any difference in those shootings. The same nuts could find a litany of ways to cause the same carnage. A sane person with a gun could also stop the carnage much quicker, but anti-gun nuts oppose that too.

You mean like El Paso? There were tons of guns there. Comon, it's Texas for crying out loud. They were too busy ducking and covering to pull their weapons. But it took the cops less than a minute to bring him down. Had it been allowed to go for a couple of minutes, the choice of weapon would have been devastating. Or if he had continued to fire even after contested. Having sillyvillians with guns doesn't make it better. Remember the one where the good guy was shot by the cop? The cop gets there after it's started and only sees a person with a gun.

Yes, there are videos out there that tells you what to do but gimme' a break. Humans aren't wired that way. Training is to get us to do something we normally won't do in real life.

What did he do that he could not have done with a few semi-automatic pistols?

More of the dog and pony act. I would have to have a whole bunch of handguns on ropes hung around my neck to come up with the firepower of just one AR. It would be a ***** just to get through the doors or run or walk fast or ......... You wouldn't reload the handgun, you would drop it and grab the next one in order to stay with the reload speed of the AR. And the number of rounds in a 18 shot handgun versus 4 or 5 AR 30 round Mags means that you will need how many handguns? I'll let you do the math on this one. You brought the wrong tool bag.

Lol
Actually in close quarters the Advantage goes to the handgun every time, you need to educate yourself on the subject it’s best if you stay in seclusion in your safe space

 

[Rustic]

***\\\This Is My Opinion///***

I believe Liberals want to ban the AR-15 for two reasons...

1. The AR-15 is scary looking, it's that simple. The AR-15 is scary looking and it's easy to get people to think the AR-15 is bad because of the way it looks.

2. Here's the main reason why Liberals want to ban the AR-15. If Liberals are successful, they can then point to other guns as more powerful and say "We banned the AR-15 so we should ban all of these other weapons because they are more powerful and accurate."

That's why the big push to ban the AR-15.

The left wants to ban not only AR-15's, AK-47's and similar types, not because they look scary, the left looks at countries which banned firearms for the public in general (Soviet Union, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, China, et cetera) and sees that once the public is disarmed, they are no longer a threat to the government, once the oppressive laws are implemented. What we are seeing is the rise of a potential oppressive/tyrannical government and the only solution may be civil war.

No one seeks to ‘ban’ guns or ‘disarm’ civilians.

You can't possibly be so naive to believe this.

The title to this thread is misleading. Many Moderates and Conservatives wish to ban or heavily regulate the AR-15 as well. You don't have to be a Rightwingnutjob to be a conservative anymore than you have to be a leftwingnutjob to be a liberal. If that is the message you are receiving then, as Jeff Foxworthy might say, "You may be a wingnutjob".

Lol
Actually you’re not a conservative if you want to ban ARs you silly little fuckers

 

[SweetTea]

Tell that to the parents of all those kids killed in school shootings

Tell it to the families of the 500 shot at the Vegas concert.

Neither the gun itself nor the type of gun made any difference in those shootings. The same nuts could find a litany of ways to cause the same carnage. A sane person with a gun could also stop the carnage much quicker, but anti-gun nuts oppose that too.

You mean like El Paso? There were tons of guns there. Comon, it's Texas for crying out loud. They were too busy ducking and covering to pull their weapons. But it took the cops less than a minute to bring him down. Had it been allowed to go for a couple of minutes, the choice of weapon would have been devastating. Or if he had continued to fire even after contested. Having sillyvillians with guns doesn't make it better. Remember the one where the good guy was shot by the cop? The cop gets there after it's started and only sees a person with a gun.

Yes, there are videos out there that tells you what to do but gimme' a break. Humans aren't wired that way. Training is to get us to do something we normally won't do in real life.

What did he do that he could not have done with a few semi-automatic pistols?

More of the dog and pony act. I would have to have a whole bunch of handguns on ropes hung around my neck to come up with the firepower of just one AR. It would be a ***** just to get through the doors or run or walk fast or ......... You wouldn't reload the handgun, you would drop it and grab the next one in order to stay with the reload speed of the AR. And the number of rounds in a 18 shot handgun versus 4 or 5 AR 30 round Mags means that you will need how many handguns? I'll let you do the math on this one. You brought the wrong tool bag.

For starters, the El Paso shooter didn't use an AR. He used a semi-automatic AK-47(WASR-10) so we are already talking about banning something other than AR-15's. Secondly, how do you know how many rounds were fired? 22 people died and 24 were injured. Some of those may have been hit more than once and he likely missed some, so let's say he shot 75-76 rounds total. He would have had to reload twice if that is the case with a 30 round magazine. There are plenty of pistols with 19 round magazines. He would have only had to reload it 3 times. Not sure how that is such a huge difference. Throwing in another fully loaded magazine takes mere seconds. Not sure why you think it is quicker to reload an AR or AK than a pistol. It isn't. Ejecting and inserting a magazine from a pistol and an AR/AK involves the same process. The AK/AR is more powerful as the bullet is going at a much higher velocity, however, getting shot with a .45ACP at close range will leave quite a mark/hole.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Tell that to the parents of all those kids killed in school shootings

Tell it to the families of the 500 shot at the Vegas concert.

Neither the gun itself nor the type of gun made any difference in those shootings. The same nuts could find a litany of ways to cause the same carnage. A sane person with a gun could also stop the carnage much quicker, but anti-gun nuts oppose that too.

You mean like El Paso? There were tons of guns there. Comon, it's Texas for crying out loud. They were too busy ducking and covering to pull their weapons. But it took the cops less than a minute to bring him down. Had it been allowed to go for a couple of minutes, the choice of weapon would have been devastating. Or if he had continued to fire even after contested. Having sillyvillians with guns doesn't make it better. Remember the one where the good guy was shot by the cop? The cop gets there after it's started and only sees a person with a gun.

Yes, there are videos out there that tells you what to do but gimme' a break. Humans aren't wired that way. Training is to get us to do something we normally won't do in real life.

What did he do that he could not have done with a few semi-automatic pistols?

More of the dog and pony act. I would have to have a whole bunch of handguns on ropes hung around my neck to come up with the firepower of just one AR. It would be a ***** just to get through the doors or run or walk fast or ......... You wouldn't reload the handgun, you would drop it and grab the next one in order to stay with the reload speed of the AR. And the number of rounds in a 18 shot handgun versus 4 or 5 AR 30 round Mags means that you will need how many handguns? I'll let you do the math on this one. You brought the wrong tool bag.

For starters, the El Paso shooter didn't use an AR. He used a semi-automatic AK-47(WASR-10) so we are already talking about banning something other than AR-15's. Secondly, how do you know how many rounds were fired? 22 people died and 24 were injured. Some of those may have been hit more than once and he likely missed some, so let's say he shot 75-76 rounds total. He would have had to reload twice if that is the case with a 30 round magazine. There are plenty of pistols with 19 round magazines. He would have only had to reload it 3 times. Not sure how that is such a huge difference. Throwing in another fully loaded magazine takes mere seconds. Not sure why you think it is quicker to reload an AR or AK than a pistol. It isn't. Ejecting and inserting a magazine from a pistol and an AR/AK involves the same process. The AK/AR is more powerful as the bullet is going at a much higher velocity, however, getting shot with a .45ACP at close range will leave quite a mark/hole.

Think about what you just posted. The AK, like the AR is designed for one thing and one thing only. To kill as many people as possible with as little training as possible while under heavy fire. Again, there is nothing left to an AR other than function. And he did this in a matter of seconds. That means he changed out his mags at least 3 times in a matter of seconds before the cops brought him down. The difference here is, the projectile from both the AK and AR pass through at least 2 or 3 people before it comes to a stop. In order to do a kill rate of 22 and an injury rate of 24, he did not have to hit 46 direct hits.

Your example of the 45 is a poor one. The 45ACP makes a larger hole but the penetration is lower because the speed is lower by more than a third. The 45 operates on a shock value and does it well. It's still one of the best large framed Personal and Home Defense Weapons out there because if it hits anywhere, the shock value is high. But the death rate is quite low. I don't know where I heard it but I believe it was from the Denver Police Chief when he asked why they were going away from the 45s. He said it was easier to train on a 9mm or 40SW than the 45. But the 9mm, you had to make more holes to get the same affect. And with the 45, you only had to plug one hole. Chances are, the 45ACP would not leave an exit wound so only one hole would have to be plugged. The death rate would be lower than either the AR or the AK.

I happen to be a big fan of the Colt 1911A1. (yes, Dorathy, I am a failure as a gun grabber). I know the strong points and the limitations of it. I also am a retired Military Member and have a pretty good idea on the strong points and the limitations of the 556 (or it's slightly weaker cousin, the 223). And I have spent time on the AK as well both semi auto and full auto and have a pretty good idea on it's strong points and weaknesses. And believe it or not, in the Walmart shooting, the AK is superior to even the AR. And you don't understand why.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What?

You just make shit up with no regard for facts or reality.

No, the barrel doesn't "heat up faster."

The AR is lighter due to a composite stock and has a pistol grip. Those are really the only functional differences.

You leave out the fact that it reloads blindingly fast in comparison to the Mini-14 when under duress by a non combat trained person. The very reason it's the primary gun used by MOST Militaries around the world today.

Again, you Communists just make shit up.

Both rifles use a magazine that is based on a compression spring. There is zero difference in how either rifle reloads.

You're not just liars, you're stupid.

One goes straight in and uses gravity to extract the mag while the other requires the mag to be rocked forward by hand to release the mag. That makes reloading speed quite a difference. And the difference is what keeps the Mini-14 off the same regulation and ban lists that the AR-15 constantly finds itself.

Utter nonsense.

I have two mini-14's. As long as the action is open, it snaps in with no resistance.

It takes one of your hands to release the mag. The M-16 just falls out. Anyone that has used both knows the difference. And anyone that ever served knows the difference. You are just a smart mouth troll.

That wasn't your lie. What you lied was {One goes straight in and uses gravity to extract the mag while the other requires the mag to be rocked forward by hand to release the mag. } No one "rocks" the magazine in a Mini-14. Further the M-16 is NOT the AR-15 despite your abject dishonesty.

 

[LuckyDuck]

***\\\This Is My Opinion///***

I believe Liberals want to ban the AR-15 for two reasons...

1. The AR-15 is scary looking, it's that simple. The AR-15 is scary looking and it's easy to get people to think the AR-15 is bad because of the way it looks.

2. Here's the main reason why Liberals want to ban the AR-15. If Liberals are successful, they can then point to other guns as more powerful and say "We banned the AR-15 so we should ban all of these other weapons because they are more powerful and accurate."

That's why the big push to ban the AR-15.

The left wants to ban not only AR-15's, AK-47's and similar types, not because they look scary, the left looks at countries which banned firearms for the public in general (Soviet Union, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, China, et cetera) and sees that once the public is disarmed, they are no longer a threat to the government, once the oppressive laws are implemented. What we are seeing is the rise of a potential oppressive/tyrannical government and the only solution may be civil war.

What WE are seeing is the gunnutters are still trying to play the old Fear Game. Hate to break it to you but people are more afraid of losing their children to nutcases with "Legal" ARs than they are about whether you can have all the dangerous toys you want to play with.

Your whole thing is nothing but a Circus Act with a dog and pony. Get new materiel.

Your children have a better chance of being eaten by a bear in the middle of the city than being gunned down in a school by a mentally-ill person or terrorist (which you want to come in unvetted by the government, through open borders).
Apparently, you seem not to grasp that there are close to a HUNDRED MILLION private citizens who legally purchased lawful firearms in the USA and its territories...AND...aren't committing crime one with them, nor are any likely to. We are no threat to you, your family or, your friends.
People who own firearms are almost to a person, not a "nutter," as you seem to like to describe us. We own them, enjoy them on the range, or, also in my case, have a concealed carry permit and mind our own business.
You on the other hand, are the Socialist/Communist left that wants to disarm the very people who our founding fathers wanted to ensure were armed, should the domestic government ever become tyrannical, of which your government will likely become, as all strict Socialist/Communist countries do become.