If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   The history of the AR-15, the gun used at Sandy Hook. Since the media doing this, I'm impressed we're not looking at a picture of the AK-47. I mean, they're both assault rifles and both have "A" in their name   (tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 667
    More: Interesting, Sandy Hook, assault rifles, Kalashnikov, Palm City, semi-automatic rifle, John Allen Muhammad, Cerberus Capital Management LP, assault weapons ban  
•       •       •

13564 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Dec 2012 at 10:07 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



667 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-21 10:30:09 AM
www.enemyplanet.com
 
2012-12-21 10:30:11 AM

thurstonxhowell: So the media can get it right and gun nuts will still whine?

Seriously, is there a whinier group of crybabies than gun owners? I certainly haven't encountered one.


Where do you live that there are no catholics, jews, or islamists?
 
2012-12-21 10:30:27 AM

RussianPooper: It's funny when gun nuts grabbers act pretend like knowing things about guns suffices for intelligence.


Works just as well
 
2012-12-21 10:30:31 AM
I like me some firepower (learned to shoot using the FN FAL), but I'm at a loss to explain how someone could justify owning an AR-15. They exist to put a lot of firepower in a lot of targets very quickly while only just giving a nod to existing gun laws. I would add that had Adam Lanza been carrying a full auto assault rifle, he'd have sprayed, wounding more, but killing less kids. The AR-15 makes you pick your shots.
 
2012-12-21 10:30:36 AM

bungle_jr: LasersHurt: You and I all know that there is no term which would be found generally acceptable for semi-auto civilian versions of military weapons.

i always thought "gun" was a perfect word. succinct, correct, poignant, with undertones of oak and berries


You're right. I should only call my car a "car". If someone asks me to describe the car, I should not say "sedan". I should absolutely not mention that it has a "V6". No, "car" will do. I will vigorously object to any attempts to separate my car from other cars. Car will describe a Mack truck just as well it describes my car.

In fact, why even go that far? "Vehicle" should cover it. Why have different words to describe my car and a dune buggy? Aren't they both just vehicles?

Hell, why do we need the word "vehicle", for that matter? I drove my "object" to "place" today. That should be just fine.
 
2012-12-21 10:30:42 AM

FightDirector: thurstonxhowell: Dimensio: "Assault weapon" is a poor term with no established definition that is intentionally utilized to confuse civilian sporting rifles with military weapons.

"Civilian sporting rifle", when used to describe an AR-15, is one of the most ham-fisted attempts at political correctness I've ever seen.

How about this? Is this a legitimate civilian sporting rifle?

[i1.wp.com image 850x209]

That firearm is a Mini-14, a rifle that can accept a magazine that holds 5, 10, 20, or 30 rounds (or larger). It fires a bullet approximately .223 inches wide, at a velocity of about 2800 feet per second. It can fire one - and ONLY one - round each time you pull the trigger.


The scary man's firearm is an AR-15. It can accept a magazine that holds 5, 10, 20, or 30 rounds (or larger; Betamags can hold approx 100 rounds but have horrific jam rates). It fires a bullet approximately .223 inches wide, at a velocity of about 2800 feet per second. It can fire one - and ONLY one - round each time you pull the trigger. It is covered in black plastic, which makes it lighter and theoretically more impact-resistant. These facts are scary, yes? It looks like this:

[blogs.suntimes.com image 850x250]

They are, functionally, the SAME FARKING GUN. They shoot the same bullet, from magazines of the same size, at the same velocity. But one looks dammed scary, while one looks a lot like a hunting rifle you see on the wall.

There is quite literally no way to word a gun ban - while being intellectually honest - that will make a difference (because you can get a gun that does the same thing - or more - in a different cosmetic package) or word one in such a way that will not become a *de facto* ban on ALL guns. And while the latter may be a desirable goal to some minds, there is simply no actual, practical way to make it happen, without setting the military loose on the civilian population in a house-to-house and turning our country into another Afghanistan-style military quagmire.


To be fair, the Mini-14 looks like the rifle from the A-Team and that thing never shot anyone.
 
2012-12-21 10:31:02 AM
About that mistaken identity...
img.tapatalk.com
/hot
 
2012-12-21 10:31:14 AM

tetsoushima: bungle_jr: T.M.S.: "Assault Rifle" is up there with "politically correct". Two terms that were stupid to coin in the first place and today are only used by those that feel oppressed by them.
exactly. anything that can harm someone can be used in an "assault"

"1a : a violent physical or verbal attack b : a military attack usually involving direct combat with enemy forces c : a concerted effort (as to reach a goal or defeat an adversary)
2a : a threat or attempt to inflict offensive physical contact or bodily harm on a person (as by lifting a fist in a threatening manner) that puts the person in immediate danger of or in apprehension of such harm or contact"

ban fists!

If criminals are going to break laws anyways, why bother having laws, right?


not at all the point i was making or attempting to make.
 
2012-12-21 10:31:29 AM

r1niceboy: I like me some firepower (learned to shoot using the FN FAL), but I'm at a loss to explain how someone could justify owning an AR-15. They exist to put a lot of firepower in a lot of targets very quickly while only just giving a nod to existing gun laws. I would add that had Adam Lanza been carrying a full auto assault rifle, he'd have sprayed, wounding more, but killing less kids. The AR-15 makes you pick your shots.


AR-15 ownership is justified in the same way that Mini-14 ownership is justified.
 
2012-12-21 10:31:35 AM

Vaneshi: So he used an assault rifle to kill people. Ok, that follows. What is with the constant media coverage here? This sensationalises the murders and basically gives a highscore and a come on to try better to every other nutter with a gun out there.

Besides which, even someone like myself who lives in the UK can easily understand that the weapon is ambivalent here; it didn't aim itself then pull it's own trigger. Someone had to do that to make it fire. Guns don't kill people, people use guns to kill people.

I don't get the whole gun ownership thing (not American after all) but even I understand that you can't legislate for the random fruitloop going crazy... because they're random fruitloops. But the media could do a lot more to make such occurrences well 'boring' ya know?

AR-15? Isn't that the civilian version of the M-16 the rifle issued to most of America's armed forces? I'd have thought they'd of been pretty easy to get.... in America.


they are easy to get, and just as the sales figures in the article said, they will continue to be easy to get.  someone is paying for all this "freedom" marketing in the media.  there are very few political opinions without financial backing.  although, i'm not trying to by some conspiratorial cynic, making money is what makes a country work and have nice things.  so, whatever.
 
2012-12-21 10:32:06 AM

Molavian: Ah, yes. The automatic rifle 15. It uses extended clips to carry more bullets.


Older versions like the one the guy used in Oregon jam most of the time with a 30 round clip, just like his did
 
2012-12-21 10:33:06 AM
i51.tinypic.com
I still shake my head that during the height of the coverage of Sandy Hook, Megyn Kelly at Fox reported that the shooter is suspected to have a 9mm handgun and a Glock.
 
2012-12-21 10:33:45 AM

xaks: thurstonxhowell: So the media can get it right and gun nuts will still whine?

Seriously, is there a whinier group of crybabies than gun owners? I certainly haven't encountered one.

Where do you live that there are no catholics, jews, or islamists?


I live in a place with plenty of all of those (assuming you replace "islamists" with "Muslims"). Hell, I'm engaged to a Catholic. I've heard less whining from them in a decade than I hear every time a gun is mentioned in any news story.
 
2012-12-21 10:33:45 AM

FightDirector: There is quite literally no way to word a gun ban - while being intellectually honest - that will make a difference (because you can get a gun that does the same thing - or more - in a different cosmetic package) or word one in such a way that will not become a *de facto* ban on ALL guns. And while the latter may be a desirable goal to some minds, there is simply no actual, practical way to make it happen, without setting the military loose on the civilian population in a house-to-house and turning our country into another Afghanistan-style military quagmire.


...dammit. "Preview", not "post"...

Append to all that this last point: if Adam Lanza had been equipped with a Mini-14 instead of an AR-15, how would what happened have been measurably different, given that the firearms are effectively identical, performance-wise?

Save for people not being able to complain about "military-style assault guns", of course.
 
2012-12-21 10:33:53 AM

thurstonxhowell: So the media can get it right and gun nuts will still whine?

Seriously, is there a whinier group of crybabies than gun owners? I certainly haven't encountered one.


Fark progressive are far whinier. But then you probably are one so it's not X when you do it.
 
2012-12-21 10:34:17 AM

bungle_jr: LasersHurt: You and I all know that there is no term which would be found generally acceptable for semi-auto civilian versions of military weapons.

i always thought "gun" was a perfect word. succinct, correct, poignant, with undertones of oak and berries


That's just silly. The greatest power of our language is to describe different things. I'm sure we can figure it out.
 
2012-12-21 10:34:33 AM
As a fan of guns, I still can't understand why any civilian needs a 30 round clip.

We were at the range the other day with some friends, shooting some old .22 and a pistol. At the end of the range were two guys firing off an AR-15. (One of them was an instructor, methinks.) I have to admit, I gave it more than a good look. It was a nice firearm, and in the hands of an idiot he was making groupings that embarrassed we who were shooting Boy scout grade rifles with iron sights.

Still, in a range setting, that puppy was WAY out of place. Somebody buying that thing is not in the same league with recreational shooters, hunters, and the like. That gun is really only good for mowing down human beings at a lot of them. It doesn't have the stopping power for big game. It is overkill for small game. There are even rules for bird hunting that limit shotguns to a 3 round magazine. 30 rounds is military load out, and has no place outside of war.
 
2012-12-21 10:34:36 AM

FightDirector: There is quite literally no way to word a gun ban - while being intellectually honest - that will make a difference (because you can get a gun that does the same thing - or more - in a different cosmetic package) or word one in such a way that will not become a *de facto* ban on ALL guns. And while the latter may be a desirable goal to some minds, there is simply no actual, practical way to make it happen, without setting the military loose on the civilian population in a house-to-house and turning our country into another Afghanistan-style military quagmire.


So therefore let's give up and give everyone more guns, right?

I am not buying the notion that you can't ban a Bushmaster without also effectively banning a .22 handgun. You're not getting out of this one without at least some type of legislation being introduced. You might as well TRY and help because if you just sit there whining 'but it's too haaaaaaaard', we're just going to do it without you and you're not going to like what we come up with.
 
2012-12-21 10:35:10 AM
Once owned a Bushmaster CAR-15, never fired a shot in anger, never owned a PitBull either.

Do we get a description of the history of the car used to run over people at a farmers market?
 
2012-12-21 10:35:15 AM

Bongo Blue: thurstonxhowell: So the media can get it right and gun nuts will still whine?

Seriously, is there a whinier group of crybabies than gun owners? I certainly haven't encountered one.

Bikers. The motorcyle type.


Oh, I'd say the pedal type bikers are a pretty whiny bunch too.

And red light runners - they seem to whine alot when we try to ticket them.

And don't forget how much the non-smokers whine about the smokers.
 
2012-12-21 10:35:49 AM

r1niceboy: I would add that had Adam Lanza been carrying a full auto assault rifle, he'd have sprayed, wounding more, but killing less kids.


This is an excellent point.  The worst thing you can do to the opposing military is wound.  If you kill, you reduced the force by 1.  If you wound, there's an entire logistics team that now has to mobilize to keep that soldier alive.
 
2012-12-21 10:35:53 AM

Endive Wombat: [i51.tinypic.com image 640x533]
I still shake my head that during the height of the coverage of Sandy Hook, Megyn Kelly at Fox reported that the shooter is suspected to have a 9mm handgun and a Glock.


Lets ban extended clips .
 
2012-12-21 10:36:15 AM

Endive Wombat: [i51.tinypic.com image 640x533]
I still shake my head that during the height of the coverage of Sandy Hook, Megyn Kelly at Fox reported that the shooter is suspected to have a 9mm handgun and a Glock.


Well, to be fair, her statement was accurate. He indeed had a 9mm Sig and a 10mm Glock. Since the Glock wasn't also a 9mm, nor was it a Sig Sauer, it does belong to a different set than "9mm handgun", and the Sig does not belong to the discrete set "Glock", thus her statement was factually correct.
 
2012-12-21 10:36:28 AM

Evil Twin Skippy: Still, in a range setting, that puppy was WAY out of place. Somebody buying that thing is not in the same league with recreational shooters, hunters, and the like. That gun is really only good for mowing down human beings at a lot of them. It doesn't have the stopping power for big game. It is overkill for small game.


The .223 Remington round is suitable for coyotes, wild hogs and similar-sized animals.

Companies have recently developed AR-15 style rifles chambered in larger calibers suitable for deer hunting.

My AR-15 is currently configured to fire .22LR ammunition. The conversion kit included a 26 round magazine.
 
2012-12-21 10:36:38 AM

FightDirector: There is quite literally no way to word a gun ban [...] in such a way that will not become a *de facto* ban on ALL guns.


What the fark is this shiat?
 
2012-12-21 10:36:47 AM
Too bad we are not putting nearly as much energy in taking care of what is very likely a mental health situation. I'd rather cure/control crazy than harp on anything else right now.
 
2012-12-21 10:36:59 AM
CSB: Around this time 3 years ago, someone in a neighboring town shot up a Chinese food restaurant with an AK-47 because they refused to serve him any more alcohol. He started screaming it was because he was white, went out to his truck to get the gun, and sprayed a bunch of bullets in the place hitting no one. Another patron grabbed him and pulled him outside where the guy sprayed another burst of bullets hitting nothing but a few parked cars and the window of a jewelry store.
 
2012-12-21 10:37:14 AM
Remus, you want a Gandhi quote?

"I cannot teach you violence, as I do not myself believe in it. I can only teach you not to bow your heads before any one even at the cost of your life."
 
2012-12-21 10:37:34 AM

RussianPooper: It's funny when gun nuts act like knowing things about guns suffices for intelligence.


It's funnier when the ignorant revel in their ignorance of a subject as if knowing factual things is somehow unclean or uncouth.

Well... it's not so funny when they're in congress. Or in the media.

I don't care if you have thirteen doctorates and have an IQ of 240. If your level of knowledge is "what I saw on TV", for that topic, you're an idiot. If I want to know about the fine details of the inner workings of a BMW, what to do and what not to do, I'll go to the high school dropout that makes his livelihood fixing BMWs, not the multiply degreed lawyer that doesn't know to change the oil.
 
2012-12-21 10:37:50 AM

the.swartz: Too bad we are not putting nearly as much energy in taking care of what is very likely a mental health situation. I'd rather cure/control crazy than harp on anything else right now.


Are you just ignoring the calls for mental health access? The president himself calling for increased access to care?
 
2012-12-21 10:37:56 AM

WTF Indeed: FightDirector: thurstonxhowell: Dimensio: "Assault weapon" is a poor term with no established definition that is intentionally utilized to confuse civilian sporting rifles with military weapons.

"Civilian sporting rifle", when used to describe an AR-15, is one of the most ham-fisted attempts at political correctness I've ever seen.

How about this? Is this a legitimate civilian sporting rifle?

[i1.wp.com image 850x209]

That firearm is a Mini-14, a rifle that can accept a magazine that holds 5, 10, 20, or 30 rounds (or larger). It fires a bullet approximately .223 inches wide, at a velocity of about 2800 feet per second. It can fire one - and ONLY one - round each time you pull the trigger.


The scary man's firearm is an AR-15. It can accept a magazine that holds 5, 10, 20, or 30 rounds (or larger; Betamags can hold approx 100 rounds but have horrific jam rates). It fires a bullet approximately .223 inches wide, at a velocity of about 2800 feet per second. It can fire one - and ONLY one - round each time you pull the trigger. It is covered in black plastic, which makes it lighter and theoretically more impact-resistant. These facts are scary, yes? It looks like this:

[blogs.suntimes.com image 850x250]

They are, functionally, the SAME FARKING GUN. They shoot the same bullet, from magazines of the same size, at the same velocity. But one looks dammed scary, while one looks a lot like a hunting rifle you see on the wall.

There is quite literally no way to word a gun ban - while being intellectually honest - that will make a difference (because you can get a gun that does the same thing - or more - in a different cosmetic package) or word one in such a way that will not become a *de facto* ban on ALL guns. And while the latter may be a desirable goal to some minds, there is simply no actual, practical way to make it happen, without setting the military loose on the civilian population in a house-to-house and turning our country into another Afghanistan-style military quagmire.

To be fair, the Mini-14 looks like the rifle from the A-Team and that thing never shot anyone.


It was the weapon used in the deadliest shootout in FBI history. So there's that.
 
2012-12-21 10:38:12 AM

thurstonxhowell: bungle_jr: LasersHurt: You and I all know that there is no term which would be found generally acceptable for semi-auto civilian versions of military weapons.

i always thought "gun" was a perfect word. succinct, correct, poignant, with undertones of oak and berries

You're right. I should only call my car a "car". If someone asks me to describe the car, I should not say "sedan". I should absolutely not mention that it has a "V6". No, "car" will do. I will vigorously object to any attempts to separate my car from other cars. Car will describe a Mack truck just as well it describes my car.

In fact, why even go that far? "Vehicle" should cover it. Why have different words to describe my car and a dune buggy? Aren't they both just vehicles?

Hell, why do we need the word "vehicle", for that matter? I drove my "object" to "place" today. That should be just fine.


semi-automatic assault vehicle works for many of today's modern mid-range, luxery, and sports cars, what with their clutchless manual-shift options and such

no, i suppose if you have a need to further expand on which type of gun you have, most definitely have another more specific term. "assault-__________" is simply oxymoronic, though, considering, as i and many others have said, ANYTHING that can hurt someone is capable of assault

/not at all a "gun-person"
 
2012-12-21 10:38:24 AM

Gosling: FightDirector: There is quite literally no way to word a gun ban - while being intellectually honest - that will make a difference (because you can get a gun that does the same thing - or more - in a different cosmetic package) or word one in such a way that will not become a *de facto* ban on ALL guns. And while the latter may be a desirable goal to some minds, there is simply no actual, practical way to make it happen, without setting the military loose on the civilian population in a house-to-house and turning our country into another Afghanistan-style military quagmire.

So therefore let's give up and give everyone more guns, right?

I am not buying the notion that you can't ban a Bushmaster without also effectively banning a .22 handgun. You're not getting out of this one without at least some type of legislation being introduced. You might as well TRY and help because if you just sit there whining 'but it's too haaaaaaaard', we're just going to do it without you and you're not going to like what we come up with.


Opposing an unreasonable prohibition is not logically equivalent to opposing any new regulation.

No evidence has been prevented that banning "Bushmaster" rifles would have prevented the incident at Newtown.
 
2012-12-21 10:38:29 AM

Evil Twin Skippy: As a fan of guns, I still can't understand why any civilian needs a 30 round clip.


For me, they were a great thing to have when hunting varmints during winter. Didn't want to have to reload that thing up ever 3 mintes, especially when the fingers were not working all that well due to the cold.

Is it a need? No. Pretty handy though.
 
2012-12-21 10:38:31 AM
Fark it, I'll make my own guns.

englishrussia.com

englishrussia.com

englishrussia.com

englishrussia.com

englishrussia.com

/From link
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-12-21 10:39:18 AM

HeadLever: LasersHurt: You and I all know that there is no term which would be found generally acceptable for semi-auto civilian versions of military weapons.

That would work for me. It won't be used though because it is not as easily associated with a harmful intent as all of these rifles must. We need to have 'assault', 'killing' 'attack', or 'accost' in its name.



Assault Rifle is the literal translation from German of the actual military designation of the StG 44.  It's hilarious that people who mock the media for not knowing about guns think it is some term made up by activists.  Or maybe the NRA is out to revise history again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_44
 
2012-12-21 10:39:32 AM

BolshyGreatYarblocks: A lot of American servicemen died in Vietnam because the North Vietnamese soldiers' AK-47s kept jamming? Is that the difference?


I worked with a Vietnam vet, and once we got into a semi-serious discussion at the end of a staff meeting
of what weapon we'd use if we ever decided to gun down our coworkers.

I was firmly in the AK-47 camp since it is very reliable.  My coworker was a staunch defender of the M-16,
saying that the only reason it got a bad reputation was that it was given to Marines who didn't know how
to clean them properly.

In the end, we mutually decided that since really loved and respected our officemates as people we'd use
a machete.

Meanwhile, our then-new supervisor was sitting in the corner, shaking his head and saying "Guys, you
know I'm supposed to report this, right?"  Thankfully, it later turned out he was just as much a weirdo
reprobate as anyone on our team, and he was a great boss for 2 years.

/Nowadays, though, there probably would have been a SWAT team waiting in our cubicles.
 
2012-12-21 10:40:01 AM

FightDirector:
There is quite literally no way to word a gun ban - while being intellectually honest - that will make a difference (because you can get a gun that does the same thing - or more - in a different cosmetic package) or word one in such a way that will not become a *de facto* ban on ALL guns. And while the latter may be a desirable goal to some minds, there is simply no actual, practical way to make it happen, without setting the military loose on the civilian population in a house-to-house and turning our country into another Afghanistan-style military quagmire.

----

Not to mention that once you start barging into peoples houses with the military you've violated the Posse Comitatus Act.
And the 4th amendment.

Not only would you have an all out civil war. You'd have that civil war rightfully so, meaning people of the military and government would also revolt, making it even more chaotic.
 
2012-12-21 10:40:29 AM

Dimensio: No evidence has been prevented that banning "Bushmaster" rifles would have prevented the incident at Newtown.


The fact that the Bushmaster AR-15 was legally purchased by the shooter's mom and that it was the gun used in the shooting isn't evidence enough for you?
 
2012-12-21 10:41:01 AM

Evil Twin Skippy: As a fan of guns, I still can't understand why any civilian needs a 30 round clip.

We were at the range the other day with some friends, shooting some old .22 and a pistol. At the end of the range were two guys firing off an AR-15. (One of them was an instructor, methinks.) I have to admit, I gave it more than a good look. It was a nice firearm, and in the hands of an idiot he was making groupings that embarrassed we who were shooting Boy scout grade rifles with iron sights.

Still, in a range setting, that puppy was WAY out of place. Somebody buying that thing is not in the same league with recreational shooters, hunters, and the like. That gun is really only good for mowing down human beings at a lot of them. It doesn't have the stopping power for big game. It is overkill for small game. There are even rules for bird hunting that limit shotguns to a 3 round magazine. 30 rounds is military load out, and has no place outside of war.


You claim to have been "at the range" and you actually ask why a civilian would need a 30 round magazine? Seriously? How many times do you have to stop to refill your magazines with fresh ammo? It takes a bit of time doesn't it? Hurts the fingers too if you don't have a loader, right? Why does a civilian need a 30 round mag? Because it makes shooting at the range far more enjoyable; you can shoot longer without refilling mags and, thus, save time, which many ranges charge you by the hour.  I'd rather load up 10 thirty round mags to go to the range than 30 ten round mags. Saves space in my range bag. Also, it's a lot faster to fill with my loader device.
 
2012-12-21 10:41:03 AM
M1A owner, with bipod and 20 round magazines here. ARs are pussy guns.

Bidding on a 1942 K98 with scope, awesome gun.
 
2012-12-21 10:41:16 AM

Gosling: Dimensio: No evidence has been prevented that banning "Bushmaster" rifles would have prevented the incident at Newtown.

The fact that the Bushmaster AR-15 was legally purchased by the shooter's mom and that it was the gun used in the shooting isn't evidence enough for you?


Are you saying that she would not have purchased a functionally equivalent firearm had "Bushmaster" brand rifles been prohibited?
 
2012-12-21 10:41:21 AM

Gosling: FightDirector: There is quite literally no way to word a gun ban - while being intellectually honest - that will make a difference (because you can get a gun that does the same thing - or more - in a different cosmetic package) or word one in such a way that will not become a *de facto* ban on ALL guns. And while the latter may be a desirable goal to some minds, there is simply no actual, practical way to make it happen, without setting the military loose on the civilian population in a house-to-house and turning our country into another Afghanistan-style military quagmire.

So therefore let's give up and give everyone more guns, right?

I am not buying the notion that you can't ban a Bushmaster without also effectively banning a .22 handgun. You're not getting out of this one without at least some type of legislation being introduced. You might as well TRY and help because if you just sit there whining 'but it's too haaaaaaaard', we're just going to do it without you and you're not going to like what we come up with.


An unenforcable law is one that should not be written. How are you going to get rid of the millions (and face it, there ARE millions) of AR-15s already out there? There's no registry. There's no way to track them. As far as the government is concerned, every person in the country has between zero and a billion firearms in their home. You can't just "wait for them to wear out"...the weapons will last 50+ years, easily, with proper care. So how do you get rid of what's already out there?

The only answer is house-to-house searches. Good farking luck with that. That'll end up killing more people than a decade of gun violence. Moreover, it will absolutely require the military to be deployed offensively against the civilian population. THERE'S a precedent we want set, right?

Your turn: what's the solution to between 70 million and 120 million gun owners who you'd have to take guns from?
 
2012-12-21 10:41:32 AM

r1niceboy: I like me some firepower (learned to shoot using the FN FAL), but I'm at a loss to explain how someone could justify owning an AR-15. They exist to put a lot of firepower in a lot of targets very quickly while only just giving a nod to existing gun laws. I would add that had Adam Lanza been carrying a full auto assault rifle, he'd have sprayed, wounding more, but killing less kids. The AR-15 makes you pick your shots.


Read United States v. Miller 1939 and you will then be able to explain why we should own AR-15s.
 
2012-12-21 10:42:09 AM
One paragraph about the history of the AR-16 and the rest about dead boy murderer. FAIL
 
2012-12-21 10:42:15 AM
The AR-15 was designed for the Army's primary mission post-WW2, i.e. urban crowd control. The B-52s were for fighting the Russians.

Why you would drop an army equipped and trained for the Watts riots into a jungle insurgency I have no idea.
 
2012-12-21 10:42:42 AM

Gosling: The fact that the Bushmaster AR-15 was legally purchased by the shooter's mom and that it was the gun used in the shooting isn't evidence enough for you?


Someone steals my car and hits a pedestrian. Ban the Honda Civic.
 
2012-12-21 10:42:54 AM
Don't the reports say that he only killed his mother with the .223? The other 26 people were shot by handguns, right?
 
2012-12-21 10:43:14 AM

Evil Twin Skippy: It is overkill for small game.


It is perfect size for varmints. It is probably the most popular caliber for the intermediate-range varmint hunting since the bullet selection and cost are very good compared to most other calibers.
 
2012-12-21 10:44:12 AM

Dimensio: Gosling: Dimensio: No evidence has been prevented that banning "Bushmaster" rifles would have prevented the incident at Newtown.

The fact that the Bushmaster AR-15 was legally purchased by the shooter's mom and that it was the gun used in the shooting isn't evidence enough for you?

Are you saying that she would not have purchased a functionally equivalent firearm had "Bushmaster" brand rifles been prohibited?


Are you saying that ANYONE has suggested to ban Bushmaster brand rifles?
 
Displayed 50 of 667 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report