Should the AR-15 be in civilian hands.
« prev   politics   next »

Comments 1 - 40 of 50     Next »     Last »

1 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 9:17am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

Yes, definitely. The push for banning the AR-15 is overwhelmingly coming from people with "statist" political leanings. Even more proof that the 2nd Amendment was written by men who knew how to build stable, long lasting, republics.
2 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 13, 9:20am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

You trying to take my guns? Fuck that.

Leftism....not even once should you even listen to or consider anything remotely leftist!

And the Constitution is meant to be shitted on. Obviously when the party in power disregards the first sentences, the rest is all trash.

What this country needs is more Christians using “God” to decide our laws!!!
3 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 9:23am   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

errc says
Leftism....not even once should you even listen to or consider anything remotely leftist!


True.

They wanted to abolish the electoral college just 12 months ago without realizing just how instrumental it has been in keeping this Republic stable.

Leftistism is cancerous.
4 joshuatrio   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 9:24am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

I don't understand the problem with AR's. I've considered getting one. It's just a semi-auto rifle.
5 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 9:28am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

joshuatrio says
I don't understand the problem with AR's. I've considered getting one. It's just a semi-auto rifle.


No different than your average M1 Carbine, or any other semi auto rifle. But leftist need a bogeyman, something to focus their anti-2nd Amendment fury on. The AR15 looks scary, and that's not good for the children.

ignore the fact that the majority of shootings occur with handguns, and over 90% of homicides committed by firearm happen in liberal controlled cities.
6 APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE   ignore (5)   2017 Nov 13, 10:16am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

It's BELT-FED! or FUCK! YOU!, AMERICA!
7 Sniper   ignore (7)   2017 Nov 13, 10:18am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

joshuatrio says
I don't understand the problem with AR's. I've considered getting one. It's just a semi-auto rifle.


Exactly right, it's just a semi auto, just like most every other rifle built today, including this squirrel shooter:



Isn't that second image really scary looking. Except, it's the exact same rifle underneath, just some different external "clothing".
8 KimJongUn   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 10:43am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

For hundreds of years the rifles and pistols in civilian hands were better and more advanced then what contemporary military had. The situation got reversed only around second half of XX century.
9 RC2006   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 7:45pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Sniper says
joshuatrio says
I don't understand the problem with AR's. I've considered getting one. It's just a semi-auto rifle.


Exactly right, it's just a semi auto, just like most every other rifle built today, including this squirrel shooter:



Isn't that second image really scary looking. Except, it's the exact same rifle underneath, just some different external "clothing".


Shoot my Winchester 63 from the 50s fires as fast as both of those.
10 anon_62240   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 8:15pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

"And I find it hard to argue with Dean Winslow—retired Air Force colonel, Trump administration appointee—when he so bluntly says it is “insane that in the United States of America a civilian can go out and buy a semiautomatic assault rifle like an AR-15.”"

Last line of the article.

Is there a reason that the public needs a semi-automatic firearm? If you're hunting, and a bolt action isn't enough, then go back to the tin can range and practice.
11 KimJongUn   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 8:16pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

anon_62240 says
Is there a reason that the public needs a semi-automatic firearm?


There is no reason for some (majority) of the public to have freedom of expression either. But a right is a right.
12 Sniper   ignore (7)   2017 Nov 13, 8:23pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

anon_62240 says
Is there a reason that the public needs a semi-automatic firearm?


Is there a reason someone needs a power drill when one of these will work:



anon_62240 says
If you're hunting, and a bolt action isn't enough, then go back to the tin can range and practice.


Only about 20% of gun owners are hunters.
13 HowdyThere   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 9:06pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

KimJongUn says
There is no reason for some (majority) of the public to have freedom of expression either.


Really? You don't believe in freedom of expression?
14 KimJongUn   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 9:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

HowdyThere says
KimJongUn says
There is no reason for some (majority) of the public to have freedom of expression either.


Really? You don't believe in freedom of expression?


Why would you assume that?
15 HowdyThere   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 9:16pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

KimJongUn says
There is no reason for some (majority) of the public to have freedom of expression either.


Maybe miscommunication, but didn't you just say the the majority has no reason for freedom of expression?
16 PeopleUnited   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 13, 9:46pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

@tovarichpeter (comrade peter) says: http://patrick.net/post/1311869/2017-11-13-should-the-ar-15-be-in-civilian-hands
Hitler, Mohammed and Stalin might ask: if civilians should be allowed to have hands on their arms. Or should they even be allowed to have hands?
17 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 13, 9:52pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

anon_62240 says
"And I find it hard to argue with Dean Winslow—retired Air Force colonel, Trump administration appointee—when he so bluntly says it is “insane that in the United States of America a civilian can go out and buy a semiautomatic assault rifle like an AR-15.”"

Last line of the article.

Is there a reason that the public needs a semi-automatic firearm? If you're hunting, and a bolt action isn't enough, then go back to the tin can range and practice.


That colonel needs to reread the constitution. The 2nd amendment doesn’t guarantee the right to bear arms to “hunt”. It states that Arms are necessary to the security of a FREE state. That’s why people own arms, not to shoot deer.

The 20th century is replete with examples of statist governments (mostly socialist/communist) going tyrannical and eliminating citizens by the millions.

Do you think Hitler would have had an easy time of surpressing 2,000,000 Jewish adult males armed with rifles, improvised explosives and other small arms? What about the citizenry of Russia’s red purge? There’s a reason why Hitler forbid Jews to own firearms and why Stalin stripped firearms rights from the citizens of the USSR. Armed internal insurrection is extremely hard to quash. Just ask US soldiers who spent time in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Any politician or citizen who thinks the 2nd amendment is about hunting lacks true understanding of the founders mindset and the political circumstances for which the 2nd amendment was born and conceived under.
18 Sniper   ignore (7)   2017 Nov 13, 10:10pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

Goran_K says
It states that Arms are necessary to the security of a FREE state. That’s why people own arms,


Not only that, but when the 2nd amendment was written, both the militia and the government basically had the same weapons (muskets).

Is it that way now? Who has the balance of power concerning weapons?

But certain politicians think there's a need to ban scary AR-15 "military assault weapons" in civilian hands. Their ignorance is astounding.
19 HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Nov 13, 10:58pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

The 2nd Amendment gives anyone the right to own firearms that they can kill you with.
20 PeopleUnited   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 5:18am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

The "In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html

"David M. Kennedy, the director of the Center for Crime Prevention and Control at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, argues that the issue of gun violence can seem enormous and intractable without first addressing poverty or drugs. A closer look at the social networks of neighborhoods most afflicted, he says, often shows that only a small number of men drive most of the violence. Identify them and change their behavior, and it’s possible to have an immediate impact."
21 Sniper   ignore (7)   2017 Nov 14, 8:02am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

PeopleUnited says
The "In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.


Which makes the whole "ban assault rifle" narrative by the left a total joke, while they ignore the hundreds of black on black handgun killings going on in Chicago every year.

Here are the stats from Chicago so far this year (and we still have two months to go):

Year to Date
Shot & Killed: 564
Shot & Wounded: 2679
Total Shot: 3243

http://heyjackass.com/
22 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 8:29am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Can someone explain how places with extremely strict gun control, such as Chicago and Oakland, can have such high gun violence rates per capita if gun control "makes people safer"?
23 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 8:36am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
Can someone explain how places with extremely strict gun control, such as Chicago and Oakland, can have such high gun violence rates per capita if gun control "makes people safer"?


Context is always important.

The War on Drugs focuses extra resources on crowded Urban areas with high density of population. It appears to be an American reaction by American citizens, to the UnAmerican armed gangs of Government Union members invading their communities, heavily armed and declaring war against them.

What did you think would happen once the Government declared war on it’s own citizens?
24 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 8:41am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

errc says
Context is always important.

The War on Drugs focuses extra resources on crowded Urban areas with high density of population. It appears to be an American reaction by American citizens, to the UnAmerican armed gangs of Government Union members invading their communities, heavily armed and declaring war against them.

What did you think would happen once the Government declared war on it’s own citizens?


I agree that the War on Drugs isn't accomplishing anything and many drugs should just be legalized (like Weed).

But the majority of victims in Chicago are black men being killed by... other black men. It's not DEA agents dropping bodies en masse in Chicago's inner city. How do you explain that?
25 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 8:47am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says
Context is always important.

The War on Drugs focuses extra resources on crowded Urban areas with high density of population. It appears to be an American reaction by American citizens, to the UnAmerican armed gangs of Government Union members invading their communities, heavily armed and declaring war against them.

What did you think would happen once the Government declared war on it’s own citizens?


I agree that the War on Drugs isn't accomplishing anything and many drugs should just be legalized (like Weed).

But the majority of victims in Chicago are black men being killed by... other black men. It's not DEA agents dropping bodies en masse in Chicago's inner city. How do you explain that?


I just explained it. They are in a war zone.

Their own government has been waging war on them for four decades.

Their community is under attack from an anti-American armed force of Government Union members.

How do you expect them to react?

How do you think you would react in those circumstances? Where the government is restricting your liberties, freedoms, and ability to participate in the economy, and ability to utilize highly beneficial flowers and agricultural Hemp?
26 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 8:53am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

errc says
How do you think you would react in those circumstances? Where the government is restricting your liberties, freedoms, and ability to participate in the economy, and ability to utilize highly beneficial flowers and agricultural Hemp?


They are being restricted from dealing drugs, pimping prostitutes, and extortion and other money making methods usually associated with organized crime. Are you saying that's their only options for employment in the community? I would strongly disagree.
27 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 8:58am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says
How do you think you would react in those circumstances? Where the government is restricting your liberties, freedoms, and ability to participate in the economy, and ability to utilize highly beneficial flowers and agricultural Hemp?


They are being restricted from dealing drugs, pimping prostitutes, and extortion and other money making methods usually associated with organized crime. Are you saying that's their only options for employment in the community? I would strongly disagree.


They are being restricted from growing Agricultural Hemp and Medicinal Cannabis, and processing it into products that are in high demand in this country. They’re being restricted from consuming Hemp micro greens for nutrition and wellness, and having their assets vandalized and seized, not to mention their community UNDER CONSTANT ATTACK FROM THEIR OWN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT?

Why do you feel the need to be disingenuous here, are you ignorant of these realities and facts?
28 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 9:03am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

errc says
They are being restricted from growing Agricultural Hemp and Medicinal Cannabis, and processing it into products that are in high demand in this country. They’re being restricted from consuming Hemp micro greens for nutrition and wellness, and having their assets vandalized and seized, not to mention their community UNDER CONSTANT ATTACK FROM THEIR OWN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT?

Why do you feel the need to be disingenuous here, are you ignorant of these realities and facts?


Weed is already legal recreationally in California, and has been medically for many years, yet Oakland still continues to have an extremely high gun violence rate despite strict gun control. Not only that, weed dispensaries and hemp production are also legal as long as you follow the regulatory framework for creating a production facility. They are choosing to sell and produce OUTSIDE of that regulatory process.
29 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 9:23am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says
They are being restricted from growing Agricultural Hemp and Medicinal Cannabis, and processing it into products that are in high demand in this country. They’re being restricted from consuming Hemp micro greens for nutrition and wellness, and having their assets vandalized and seized, not to mention their community UNDER CONSTANT ATTACK FROM THEIR OWN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT?

Why do you feel the need to be disingenuous here, are you ignorant of these realities and facts?


Weed is already legal recreationally in California, and has been medically for many years, yet Oakland still continues to have an extremely high gun violence rate despite strict gun control. Not only that, weed dispensaries and hemp production are also legal as long as you follow the regulatory framework for creating a production facility. They are choosing to sell and produce OUTSIDE of that regulatory process.


This is a lie

Federal law trumps state and local laws, so Hemp and Cannabis are still absolutely illegal. Now i know that Liberals and Leftists have fought hard to protect citizens from bad laws and UnAmerican Republican War against the citizenry, but the fact still remains: Trump and his Federal Government view Hemp and Cannabis as having no medical value, keeping it Schedule 1 and prohibiting Americans from utilizing the plants and flowers, under threat of imprisonment and seizure of their assets. Don’t deny reality, and never lie about the truth. What are you so afraid of?
30 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 9:23am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

errc says
What are you so afraid of?


Nothing. I've already stated numerous times it should be legalized nation wide but even then, there will be a regulatory framework around it.
31 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 9:35am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says
What are you so afraid of?


Nothing. I've already stated numerous times it should be legalized nation wide but even then, there will be a regulatory framework around it.


For what reason should nature’s flowers be regulated?
Thought you said you were a Libertarian? How can one claim to be a Libertarian while demanding that the State be so intrusive as to regulate which flowers people grow and consume in the privacy of their own homes? Are you drunk already?

How do you pay for the enforcement of a regulation on flower consumption and agricultural plant production?
32 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 9:37am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says
What are you so afraid of?


Nothing. I've already stated numerous times it should be legalized nation wide but even then, there will be a regulatory framework around it.


What are you doing to right this wrong?

Who are you voting for that supports your position?
33 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 9:45am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

errc says

For what reason should nature’s flowers be regulated?
Thought you said you were a Libertarian? How can one claim to be a Libertarian while demanding that the State be so intrusive as to regulate which flowers people grow and consume in the privacy of their own homes? Are you drunk already?

How do you pay for the enforcement of a regulation on flower consumption and agricultural plant production?


There is literally zero chance that weed will be legalized nation wide WITHOUT a regulatory framework. I may not agree but the truth is that in order for it to happen the government will have its hands in it.
34 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 9:54am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says

For what reason should nature’s flowers be regulated?
Thought you said you were a Libertarian? How can one claim to be a Libertarian while demanding that the State be so intrusive as to regulate which flowers people grow and consume in the privacy of their own homes? Are you drunk already?

How do you pay for the enforcement of a regulation on flower consumption and agricultural plant production?


There is literally zero chance that weed will be legalized nation wide WITHOUT a regulatory framework. I may not agree but the truth is that in order for it to happen the government will have its hands in it.


So if that’s your position, how do you intend to fund the enforcement of the regulations on plants and flowers.

You have to answer this
35 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 9:55am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

errc says
So if that’s your position, how do you intend to fund the enforcement of the regulations on plants and flowers.

You have to answer this


I don't intend to fund anything more than what is already taken from taxes I pay.

I don't know what the regulatory framework will look like. I imagine it will be similar to California but who knows.
36 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 10:00am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says
So if that’s your position, how do you intend to fund the enforcement of the regulations on plants and flowers.

You have to answer this


I don't intend to fund anything more than what is already taken from taxes I pay.

I don't know what the regulatory framework will look like. I imagine it will be similar to California but who knows.


So even though you want a restoration of personal liberties and freedoms, you’re okay with the old Statist method of confiscating large amounts of your income to fund The State Union Members who wage war on the citizenry, over the use of flowers and agricultural crops like Hemp.

That seems rather inconsistent with your claims
37 NuttBoxer   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 11:51am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

Goran_K says
Can someone explain how places with extremely strict gun control, such as Chicago and Oakland, can have such high gun violence rates per capita if gun control "makes people safer"?


Don't forget all of Mexico where guns are ILLEGAL!
38 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 11:57am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

errc says
So even though you want a restoration of personal liberties and freedoms, you’re okay with the old Statist method of confiscating large amounts of your income to fund The State Union Members who wage war on the citizenry, over the use of flowers and agricultural crops like Hemp.

That seems rather inconsistent with your claims


So do you regret voting for Bernie Sanders now? Do you finally see the evils of bigger and bigger government?
39 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 11:59am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says
So even though you want a restoration of personal liberties and freedoms, you’re okay with the old Statist method of confiscating large amounts of your income to fund The State Union Members who wage war on the citizenry, over the use of flowers and agricultural crops like Hemp.

That seems rather inconsistent with your claims


So do you regret voting for Bernie Sanders now? Do you finally see the evils of bigger and bigger government?


Huh? Bernie campaigned on limiting government waste.

Why would I ever regret voting for Government efficiency? I’m a Real American
40 Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 12:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

errc says

Huh? Bernie campaigned on limiting government waste.

Why would I ever regret voting for Government efficiency? I’m a Real American


So you eliminate government waste by creating... more government?

Comments 1 - 40 of 50     Next »     Last »


Comment as anon_84762 or log in at top of page: