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.

(Slate)   Let's talk about who really buys the AR-15   (slate.com) divider line 1354
    More: Interesting, semi-automatic rifle, semiautomatic pistols, federal assault weapons ban, Freedom Group, target shooting, Ayn Rand, car fire, long guns  
•       •       •

34414 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jan 2013 at 12:11 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1354 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 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-03 01:01:45 PM

Arkanaut: Both those weapons are slower-firing and shorter-ranged than AR-15's.


Huh. Seems to me the asshole who used a .22 LR rifle and a shotgun to go on a killing spree in the UK back in 2010 wasn't significantly inconvenienced by his lack of access to an AR-15.

Another thing to consider is that on a per-shot basis, when used within its range limitations, the 12 gauge shotgun is far more lethal than the AR-15.
 
2013-01-03 01:01:55 PM

ElBarto79: Kit Fister: As to not seeing it happen with cars...how many people died in the last month/year due to drunk drivers? I seem to recall quite a few cases involving DUIs and/or texting where a driver killed or caused an accident that killed lots of people at a time. But yeah, that's totally not the same thing, right?

Cars are a necessary component of our current civilization, assault rifles in the hands of citizens are not. Cars are not designed to kill people and have numerous legitimate uses. Assault rifles were designed specifically to kill people and are not a particularly good tool for much else.


We're not talking about assault rifles, we're talking about semi-automatics. There's a motherfarking difference and if you can't be bothered to understand it then you need to STFU and go sit at the kids table.

Secondly, killing people is a perfectly legitimate thing to do under some circumstances. If the police find an AR-15 to be an appropriate tool to use in keeping the peace and defending innocents, why shouldn't any other citizen who hasn't lost the right to do so via due process?
 
2013-01-03 01:02:32 PM

WildManBand: They should they say what they really mean--ban all guns. I'd have more respect for them.


Even a convicted felon can carry 4 (count 'em, four) colt .45 Navy pistols in side holsters and shoulder holsters open legally.
that's 24 rounds fast, if you fan them.
 
2013-01-03 01:02:35 PM
While it isn't an AR-15, I've found that an amazing target shooter is an SKS with a scope. After a couple thousand rounds, I have yet to have it jam on me. Loading the clips, with the scope, however isn't all that fun.
dixietriggers.com
/similar, not mine

A 10/22 with an aftermarket 50-round mag . . . good luck getting 10 rounds through without a jam. The OEM magazine works well though.
www.survival-gear-guide.com
/similar, but also not mine.
 
2013-01-03 01:02:53 PM

BgJonson79: Isn't the militia any able-bodied adult?


Yes, and able-bodied implies able-minded.
 
2013-01-03 01:03:03 PM

cr7pilot: I own an AR-15. I'm not a survivalist or a gun nut or a hunter. I'm a guy who enjoys going out in the desert and shooting assorted targets for fun. It's really that simple. If you like shooting as a sport, the AR-15 is a lot of fun to shoot. I understand that some people don't like shooting as a sport and think "why do you need that kind of gun" but that's just because it's not their thing. AR-15 owners don't buy AR-15s because they have some inherent desire to have more "killing power.".


So, an AR-15 is attractive the same sort of douche that would buy a Corvette. Or a Hummer.

Got it.
 
2013-01-03 01:03:17 PM

Dimensio: technicolor-misfit: I'm not for a ban, but I'd be all for putting semi-autos on a higher tier that required more stringent evaluation for purchase and regulation.of manufacture/sale.

The NRA will oppose it because they oppose all restrictions and gun control advocates will oppose it because they oppose allowing any civilian to posses such firearms.


That's ridiculous, and you should be ashamed to have said it. I advocate for "gun control," but not "gun banning."
 
2013-01-03 01:03:42 PM

dropdfun: Now if I had neighbors that were of closer proximity I would choose a weapon with less penetrating power but that's because I'm a responsible law abiding gun owner, which I'd say that over 99% of those that own and use such scary weapons are.


Bingo!

I own an AR and live in a condo, and my home defense firearm is definitely not a rifle.
 
2013-01-03 01:03:53 PM
0-media-cdn.foolz.us
 
2013-01-03 01:03:57 PM

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: To expand on that, there are really two choices:
Either
1) the 2nd Amendment is about "bambi and burglars", and thus it is perfectly reasonable to put a limits/controls on the types of guns available, or
2) the 2nd Amendment is about maintaining the ability to fight the government, which breaks down into 2 sub-choices...
2a: eliminate ALL restrictions on ALL weaponry or
2b: the entire Amendment is outdated and irrelevant and was effectively undone long ago by reality


You could do all that creativity, or you could just read the amendment. Funny how nobody seems to be putting so much editorial effort into the first amendment:

"Hmm... ya think the first amedment was supposed to only protect journalists using ink on paper? Or maybe it was supposed to protect journalsts using typewriters too... It protects every citizen? Wow, that's one interpretation I guess! Maybe it protects political speech only... If it protects all speech, then logically you must allow kiddie porn, so that couldn't be it. OH GOD HOW CAN WE KNOW WHAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS REALLY MEANT???"
 
2013-01-03 01:03:59 PM

Thunderpipes: technicolor-misfit: Teknowaffle: Fat white men who were rejected from too chickenshiat to join the military?


Let's be honest, we're talking about the most terrified people on the planet... people who like to fantasize about carrying around big bad-ass looking weapons to strike an imposing figure precisely because the reality of themselves is so very different.

Practically every gun nut I know is either a doughy nerd who's still nursing grudges about being a bullied outcast in school or a paranoid who obsesses about unrealistic threats they imagine lurking around every corner.

These are NOT Steve Rogers-types eager to rush into the fray of battle to test their mettle and unfortunately held back by physical misfortune. These are LARPers who want to play dress up as far away from the field of actual battle as possible.

You are a liberal, you don't know any gun nuts. You fantasize about them.



I was born and raised in Alabama, dumbshiat.
 
2013-01-03 01:04:02 PM

ElBarto79: Kit Fister: As to not seeing it happen with cars...how many people died in the last month/year due to drunk drivers? I seem to recall quite a few cases involving DUIs and/or texting where a driver killed or caused an accident that killed lots of people at a time. But yeah, that's totally not the same thing, right?

Cars are a necessary component of our current civilization, assault rifles in the hands of citizens are not. Cars are not designed to kill people and have numerous legitimate uses. Assault rifles were designed specifically to kill people and are not a particularly good tool for much else.


No they are not. Liberals demand we all use public transportation, because cars are evil.
 
2013-01-03 01:04:31 PM

Kit Fister: abhorrent1: the AR-15 Is Useful for Hunting and Home Defense. Not Exactly.

BS. The kid on (I think it's called) Yukon Men, uses an AR to hunt. He got a caribou and a bear with it on the few episodes I've seen.

Another thing I find amusing is the caricature that hunters using an AR and army surplus gear when they hunt are somehow different than more traditional hunters. I'm sorry, since when did I have to fill your Fudd-esque image of what a hunter is to be a hunter? Am i out to kill an animal? Am I going to do so in a safe, humane way? Well then, shut the hell up, I'll wear a goddamn clown suit if it pleases me.


At least you would be less likely to get shot by accident by another hunter if you were wearing the clown suit.
 
2013-01-03 01:05:03 PM

H31N0US: BgJonson79: Isn't the militia any able-bodied adult?

Yes, and able-bodied implies able-minded.


Who gets to decide able-minded?
 
2013-01-03 01:05:09 PM
Drug test people before providing any gun license and retest yearly.
 
2013-01-03 01:05:09 PM

LasersHurt: Dimensio: technicolor-misfit: I'm not for a ban, but I'd be all for putting semi-autos on a higher tier that required more stringent evaluation for purchase and regulation.of manufacture/sale.

The NRA will oppose it because they oppose all restrictions and gun control advocates will oppose it because they oppose allowing any civilian to posses such firearms.

That's ridiculous, and you should be ashamed to have said it. I advocate for "gun control," but not "gun banning."


LasersHurt: Dimensio: technicolor-misfit: I'm not for a ban, but I'd be all for putting semi-autos on a higher tier that required more stringent evaluation for purchase and regulation.of manufacture/sale.

The NRA will oppose it because they oppose all restrictions and gun control advocates will oppose it because they oppose allowing any civilian to posses such firearms.

That's ridiculous, and you should be ashamed to have said it. I advocate for "gun control," but not "gun banning."


I am referencing publicly prominent advocates, such as those at the Brady Center, those at the Violence Policy Center, those at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (which opposes any "violent" use of firearms under any circumstances, including self-defense) and lawmakers such as Senator Dianne Feinstein.
 
2013-01-03 01:05:19 PM

People_are_Idiots: CPT Ethanolic: Article say .223 or AR-15?  I thought AR-15s were .556?

Military AR-15 & M-16 is 5.56 mm and .223 (usually used in training). The cilivian AR-15 is .223 only. M-16 is capable of up to full auto, AR-15 is semi-auto (even though it can be modded to full).

I think the reason the AR-15 is being used more as a hunting rifle is not because of its accuracy, or ability to drop a deer out of the box... it's the familiarity and customization ability. You can make and AR shoot more than .223, with even one mod going 30-30.


Seriously, if you have no farking idea what you're posting about just don't.
 
2013-01-03 01:05:35 PM

technicolor-misfit: david_gaithersburg: TheOther: The_Sponge: TheOther: then for every assault rifle the government 'confiscates', let the government supply either a hunting rifle or shotgun (sporting or home defense - owner's choice).

How about no?

Why not?

[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 735x412]

---


And look where it got him... :)

In all seriousness, believing that the second amendment is important and believing in regulation of gun ownership are not mutually-exclusive. It says "well-regulated" right there in the amendment.

We don't let people buy fully-automatic weapons willy-nilly. There's no reason to assume that the willy-nilly sale of semi-automatics should be any more permissible or desirable.

I'm not for a ban, but I'd be all for putting semi-autos on a higher tier that required more stringent evaluation for purchase and regulation.of manufacture/sale.

/cue someone pointing out that Oswald used a bolt-action rifle


.
We The People were able to purchase fully automatic weapons up until the 60's, then our government started getting nervous. That shiat needs to be undone and has been a slippery slope since then.
 
2013-01-03 01:05:38 PM
Look people, a gun is just a tool, like a guillotine or an alligator.  Do we ban alligators for biting people?
 
2013-01-03 01:05:45 PM

technicolor-misfit: Thunderpipes: technicolor-misfit: Teknowaffle: Fat white men who were rejected from too chickenshiat to join the military?


Let's be honest, we're talking about the most terrified people on the planet... people who like to fantasize about carrying around big bad-ass looking weapons to strike an imposing figure precisely because the reality of themselves is so very different.

Practically every gun nut I know is either a doughy nerd who's still nursing grudges about being a bullied outcast in school or a paranoid who obsesses about unrealistic threats they imagine lurking around every corner.

These are NOT Steve Rogers-types eager to rush into the fray of battle to test their mettle and unfortunately held back by physical misfortune. These are LARPers who want to play dress up as far away from the field of actual battle as possible.

You are a liberal, you don't know any gun nuts. You fantasize about them.


I was born and raised in Alabama, dumbshiat.


You don't know any gun nuts. No gun nut would associate with a liberal crybaby pants.
 
2013-01-03 01:05:54 PM
I like how the writer glosses over the fact that William Spengler was an ex-con, and band from having any gun. But lets not let that stop our derp.
 
2013-01-03 01:06:03 PM

Onkel Buck: Rather own my AR-15 than my neighbors goofy looking Prius. Then again I'm not trying to take away his car because is scares me and I dont like it

You could use the money you saved on gas to buy more guns, ammo, and training.

Link
 
2013-01-03 01:06:07 PM

H31N0US: david_gaithersburg: Perhaps the first amendment should be tightly regulated too. He way not apply the mental evaluation to it and put Fark our of business.

The first amendment makes no mention of regulation. The second amendment does.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: If "the people" can own guns, how do you justify denying them to me? Am I not a person?

See above.
Not every moron in this country gets to own a gun, and nor should every kind of gun be available to the general public. There really isn't an argument here.


There isn't an argument here, because you didn't even bother to look up what "well regulated" meant when the 2nd amendment was written. Here, let me show you yet another reason why you're wrong.

The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:

1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."

1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."

1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."

1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."

1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."

1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.
 
2013-01-03 01:06:24 PM

Dimensio: LasersHurt: Dimensio: technicolor-misfit: I'm not for a ban, but I'd be all for putting semi-autos on a higher tier that required more stringent evaluation for purchase and regulation.of manufacture/sale.

The NRA will oppose it because they oppose all restrictions and gun control advocates will oppose it because they oppose allowing any civilian to posses such firearms.

That's ridiculous, and you should be ashamed to have said it. I advocate for "gun control," but not "gun banning."

LasersHurt: Dimensio: technicolor-misfit: I'm not for a ban, but I'd be all for putting semi-autos on a higher tier that required more stringent evaluation for purchase and regulation.of manufacture/sale.

The NRA will oppose it because they oppose all restrictions and gun control advocates will oppose it because they oppose allowing any civilian to posses such firearms.

That's ridiculous, and you should be ashamed to have said it. I advocate for "gun control," but not "gun banning."

I am referencing publicly prominent advocates, such as those at the Brady Center, those at the Violence Policy Center, those at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (which opposes any "violent" use of firearms under any circumstances, including self-defense) and lawmakers such as Senator Dianne Feinstein.


You're still wrong in some of those cases - Feinstein, for example, is not trying to ban all semi-automatics.
 
2013-01-03 01:06:51 PM

dropdfun: Article is rubbish with the intent to give a biased perspective. I have hunted smaller game with no issues with an AR-15 style weapon and for larger game I use my H&K G3A3 with no issues.


How do you like your G3A3? I picked up a SL8 (civilian G36) and wasn't terribly fond of its fixed stock and ergonomics. I'd been thinking about a G3, but the SL8 turned me off H&K for a bit.
 
2013-01-03 01:06:52 PM

BgJonson79: Also, some units have occasionally disregarded the wearing of helmets altogether in favor of regular camouflage hats. The reasoning behind this being that the things make it harder to hear things.

I learned that trick from Uncle Enzo in Snow Crash.


I learned it when I was wearing one and didn't hear an order from my drill instructor. Next thing I know I'm quite clearly hearing the sound of two turtles farking.
 
2013-01-03 01:07:03 PM

derpy:  AR-15 is attractive the same sort of douche that would buy a Corvette. Or a Hummer.

Got it.


because you having a different opinion than someone automatically means they're wrong and should be stripped of their rights.

Got it.
 
2013-01-03 01:07:04 PM
Summary:

I asked a friend who uses guns, and he said people using those guns are pussies. So it's OK to ban them.
 
2013-01-03 01:07:06 PM

Thunderpipes: ElBarto79: Kit Fister: As to not seeing it happen with cars...how many people died in the last month/year due to drunk drivers? I seem to recall quite a few cases involving DUIs and/or texting where a driver killed or caused an accident that killed lots of people at a time. But yeah, that's totally not the same thing, right?

Cars are a necessary component of our current civilization, assault rifles in the hands of citizens are not. Cars are not designed to kill people and have numerous legitimate uses. Assault rifles were designed specifically to kill people and are not a particularly good tool for much else.

No they are not. Liberals demand we all use public transportation, because cars are evil.


I consider myself to be a liberal (more often than not, anyway) and I like my car. I don't think they're evil -- although on the freeways here in CA, there are too damn many of them...
 
2013-01-03 01:07:08 PM
I picked up 10 empty AR lowers and made rifles fer my pals.

So many configurations and cal. choices
fun to shoot, accurate
why wouldn't someone own one?

being scared of guns, legal gun owners etc.
doesn't make you immune to bullets from bad guys
 
2013-01-03 01:07:14 PM
Cars are a necessary component of our current civilization, assault rifles in the hands of citizens are not. Cars are not designed to kill people and have numerous legitimate uses. Assault rifles were designed specifically to kill people and are not a particularly good tool for much else.


Than be logically consistent and call for a ban on alcohol.

Alcohol has absolutely zero positive social utility. It is a substance used purely for enjoyment.

Drunk driving accidents kill 10,000 people on our roads every year, including 211 kids under 14 according to the CDC (more than 20x Newton). Those numbers are just the beginning of the butcher's bill for alcohol. Tens of thousands die in the hospital due to complications with normal illness that arise due to long term heavy alcohol abuse.

And how many rapes, robberies, assaults and fights are lubricated by the perpetrators drinking? There are no hard facts, but the number is huge (likely around 50%).

The most pernicious effect though, are the hundreds of thousands of families that are torn apart when a mother or father becomes addicted to alcohol. I'm guessing the vast majority of domestic violence, child neglect and abuse is driven by alcohol.

Yet, I don't see Democrats applying their same vigorous "logic" and calling for bans on alcohol. Why?

Oh, because the vast majority of Americans enjoy drinking, and do so responsibly. Even the worst of the gun grabbing Democrats recognizes how horrendously unfair to the vast majority it would be to ban alcohol because of what a small faction of people do.

Guns are to Democrats what gay marriage is to Conservatives, a crypto issue. Democrats don't like guns, they have no personal connection to them, so banning them is no skin off their back. On the other hand, the redneck, rural, backwoods hicks that Democrats love to hate all like guns, so calling for bans and restrictions is really just a culture war win.
 
2013-01-03 01:07:22 PM

sycraft: 1) It is extremely effective, far more than pistol rounds. At ranges under 100 meters it is very lethal because a good BTHP round is going so fast it fragments on impact, causing a lot of damage.

2) It is lousy at barrier penetration. That same high velocity and penchant for fragmentation means that if it hits glass or drywall, it likewise fragments and quickly loses all its energy. So a miss does not over penetrate very much, as opposed to 12ga 00-buck which can penetrate many layers of drywall and still maintain lethal force.

3) It has low recoil, making it easy to fire multiple rounds or switch targets as needed.


To be fair, my shotgun beats most rifles using the above three criteria. As none of the rooms in my house are more than 20 feet or so long, who cares about range?
 
2013-01-03 01:07:34 PM

jshine: BarkingUnicorn: cr7pilot: CPT Ethanolic: cr7pilot: I own an AR-15. I'm not a survivalist or a gun nut or a hunter. I'm a guy who enjoys going out in the desert and shooting assorted targets for fun. It's really that simple. If you like shooting as a sport, the AR-15 is a lot of fun to shoot. I understand that some people don't like shooting as a sport and think "why do you need that kind of gun" but that's just because it's not their thing. AR-15 owners don't buy AR-15s because they have some inherent desire to have more "killing power."

 This is me as well.  I own some hand guns (one .45 and two 9mms) for "home defense" but I also just enjoy shooting.  I've been considering getting an AR15 for a while now.  Used to own an AK-47 and, although the ammo is damned expensive, they're fun to shoot.

Me too. I've got a .380 and a 9mm, but the AR-15 is fun to shoot on a long range. It's also handy for disposing of those leftover Halloween pumpkins...

It's good to see people admit that this hoopla is really about their 2nd Amendment right to have "fun."


The whole point of a *right* is that it exists independent of whether or not other people approve.

Similar arguments could be made about the 1st: since neo-Nazis and KKK members use their freedom of speech in ways you find objectionable, maybe we should just curtail it a little bit...


You have a right as long as doesn't infringe upon someone else in some way. You have a right to free speech but you do not have a right to slander someone or yell "fire" in a crowded theater. See the difference? In the same way if your idea of fun requires a tool which was specifically designed to kill lots of people, has few or zero practical uses that there are not better tools for and which is incredibly deadly in the wrong hands then you may be out of luck with regards to that particular kind of "fun".
 
2013-01-03 01:07:59 PM
Wow, don't think I've ever seen so many NRA schills in one thread before.

Really wish you gun nuts could just all have fun with paintball instead. Would be a lot less senseless deaths. But that will never happen because you slack-jawed troglodytes have to be the most selfish and degenerate subhuman wasted of life assholes to ever live.
 
2013-01-03 01:08:12 PM
Farkers just want to ban SCARY guns because they don't really get what guns are all about.  They call magazines "clips".  They don't even get the whole gun lifestyle.  They probably use gay-ass weapons like mace or a mace to defend their homes.

I'm into guns that you guys have probably never even heard of.
 
2013-01-03 01:08:12 PM

theguyyousaw: My only worry is that if the day comes, and I can barely imagine it, where the American military turns it's guns on us, and we don't have guns; What then?


Well, if you believe gun-grabbers, we're just supposed to bend over and learn to love it because their tanks, jets, etc. > our guns.
 
2013-01-03 01:08:49 PM

Karac: BgJonson79: Also, some units have occasionally disregarded the wearing of helmets altogether in favor of regular camouflage hats. The reasoning behind this being that the things make it harder to hear things.

I learned that trick from Uncle Enzo in Snow Crash.

I learned it when I was wearing one and didn't hear an order from my drill instructor. Next thing I know I'm quite clearly hearing the sound of two turtles farking.


Who knew that DIs like to be heard? ;-)
 
2013-01-03 01:09:23 PM

BgJonson79: technicolor-misfit: Teknowaffle: Fat white men who were rejected from too chickenshiat to join the military?


Let's be honest, we're talking about the most terrified people on the planet... people who like to fantasize about carrying around big bad-ass looking weapons to strike an imposing figure precisely because the reality of themselves is so very different.

Practically every gun nut I know is either a doughy nerd who's still nursing grudges about being a bullied outcast in school or a paranoid who obsesses about unrealistic threats they imagine lurking around every corner.

These are NOT Steve Rogers-types eager to rush into the fray of battle to test their mettle and unfortunately held back by physical misfortune. These are LARPers who want to play dress up as far away from the field of actual battle as possible.

And doesn't the Second Amendment guarantee their right to do just that?



Subject to regulation? Yes.
 
2013-01-03 01:09:49 PM

LasersHurt: stiletto_the_wise: LasersHurt: So you're sticking with "there is no such thing, and it doesn't matter." ?

No such thing as what? A journalist who can define "military-style"?

Nor apparently any gun owners who can define it either.


I don't know if anyone can seriously define "military-style" besides "looks kind of like something I saw on a war movie".
 
2013-01-03 01:10:00 PM

Cymbal: Wow, don't think I've ever seen so many NRA schills in one thread before.

Really wish you gun nuts could just all have fun with paintball instead. Would be a lot less senseless deaths. But that will never happen because you slack-jawed troglodytes have to be the most selfish and degenerate subhuman wasted of life assholes to ever live.


Do you have any rational commentary to offer, or are you relying upon ad hominem attacks due to an awareness that you advocate a position devoid of any intellectual merit?
 
2013-01-03 01:10:21 PM

BgJonson79: H31N0US: BgJonson79: Isn't the militia any able-bodied adult?

Yes, and able-bodied implies able-minded.

Who gets to decide able-minded?


Your mother?

assets.nydailynews.com
 
2013-01-03 01:11:05 PM
It says "well-regulated" right there in the amendment.

Yeah, except "well-regulated" doesn't mean "subject to regulation" in this context. It means "fully equipped".
 
2013-01-03 01:11:17 PM

Cymbal: Wow, don't think I've ever seen so many NRA schills in one thread before.

Really wish you gun nuts could just all have fun with paintball instead. Would be a lot less senseless deaths. But that will never happen because you slack-jawed troglodytes have to be the most selfish and degenerate subhuman wasted of life assholes to ever live.


Let us know when you take up that crusade against alcohol. It kills 80,000 people every year, far more than guns do, and it serves no purpose other than "having fun".
 
2013-01-03 01:11:22 PM

MrSteve007: While it isn't an AR-15, I've found that an amazing target shooter is an SKS with a scope. After a couple thousand rounds, I have yet to have it jam on me. Loading the clips, with the scope, however isn't all that fun.
[dixietriggers.com image 640x480]
/similar, not mine

A 10/22 with an aftermarket 50-round mag . . . good luck getting 10 rounds through without a jam. The OEM magazine works well though.
[www.survival-gear-guide.com image 456x342]
/similar, but also not mine.


Nice!

I changed the stock and grips of my SKS and added a Leupold - thing is fun as hell to shoot. The original wood stocks were made for really short people. And, oh, everybody run! I have 30 round clips for it, too! Look out!
 
2013-01-03 01:12:12 PM

stiletto_the_wise: LasersHurt: stiletto_the_wise: LasersHurt: So you're sticking with "there is no such thing, and it doesn't matter." ?

No such thing as what? A journalist who can define "military-style"?

Nor apparently any gun owners who can define it either.

I don't know if anyone can seriously define "military-style" besides "looks kind of like something I saw on a war movie".


I suspect the military could, since they designed many of them.
 
2013-01-03 01:12:12 PM

Giltric: Onkel Buck: Rather own my AR-15 than my neighbors goofy looking Prius. Then again I'm not trying to take away his car because is scares me and I dont like it
You could use the money you saved on gas to buy more guns, ammo, and training.

Link


CSB:

A friend of mine owns a Prius, and he's more of a right-winger than I am.
 
2013-01-03 01:12:15 PM

Thunderpipes: technicolor-misfit: Thunderpipes: technicolor-misfit: Teknowaffle: Fat white men who were rejected from too chickenshiat to join the military?


Let's be honest, we're talking about the most terrified people on the planet... people who like to fantasize about carrying around big bad-ass looking weapons to strike an imposing figure precisely because the reality of themselves is so very different.

Practically every gun nut I know is either a doughy nerd who's still nursing grudges about being a bullied outcast in school or a paranoid who obsesses about unrealistic threats they imagine lurking around every corner.

These are NOT Steve Rogers-types eager to rush into the fray of battle to test their mettle and unfortunately held back by physical misfortune. These are LARPers who want to play dress up as far away from the field of actual battle as possible.

You are a liberal, you don't know any gun nuts. You fantasize about them.


I was born and raised in Alabama, dumbshiat.

You don't know any gun nuts. No gun nut would associate with a liberal crybaby pants.


Says the "guy" in Vermont.  Did you and your wife take the Subaru Outback down to Massachusetts to get married yet or did Moonbeam down at the courthouse do it for you?  It's really great that you can wear your flannels and mullets and enjoy the leaves and maple syrup of Vermontistan together now that the SC allows scissor sisters to get married.
 
2013-01-03 01:12:35 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: There isn't an argument here, because you didn't even bother to look up what "well regulated" meant when the 2nd amendment was written. Here, let me show you yet another reason why you're wrong.


Ok I'll play. What part of some asshole shooting up a bunch of first graders seems to import "functioning correctly" to you? Adam Lanza was part of a "Well Regulated" (per your interpretation of the syntax) militia?
 
2013-01-03 01:12:38 PM

LasersHurt: Dimensio: LasersHurt: Dimensio: technicolor-misfit: I'm not for a ban, but I'd be all for putting semi-autos on a higher tier that required more stringent evaluation for purchase and regulation.of manufacture/sale.

The NRA will oppose it because they oppose all restrictions and gun control advocates will oppose it because they oppose allowing any civilian to posses such firearms.

That's ridiculous, and you should be ashamed to have said it. I advocate for "gun control," but not "gun banning."

LasersHurt: Dimensio: technicolor-misfit: I'm not for a ban, but I'd be all for putting semi-autos on a higher tier that required more stringent evaluation for purchase and regulation.of manufacture/sale.

The NRA will oppose it because they oppose all restrictions and gun control advocates will oppose it because they oppose allowing any civilian to posses such firearms.

That's ridiculous, and you should be ashamed to have said it. I advocate for "gun control," but not "gun banning."

I am referencing publicly prominent advocates, such as those at the Brady Center, those at the Violence Policy Center, those at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (which opposes any "violent" use of firearms under any circumstances, including self-defense) and lawmakers such as Senator Dianne Feinstein.

You're still wrong in some of those cases - Feinstein, for example, is not trying to ban all semi-automatics.


Pretty close to all of them.

Hell, her new bill would ban my 1944 Winchester M1 carbine.

Amusingly, some farker from TN a few months back was arguing with me about magazine capacity. He felt that my AR-15 was a bad stupid assault weapon but his M1 carbine would be a-okay and wasn't an "assault weapon". Guess what buddy?

Wish I could remember that guy's name.
 
2013-01-03 01:13:01 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Cymbal: Wow, don't think I've ever seen so many NRA schills in one thread before.

Really wish you gun nuts could just all have fun with paintball instead. Would be a lot less senseless deaths. But that will never happen because you slack-jawed troglodytes have to be the most selfish and degenerate subhuman wasted of life assholes to ever live.

Let us know when you take up that crusade against alcohol. It kills 80,000 people every year, far more than guns do, and it serves no purpose other than "having fun".


You are mistaken: I have used alcohol as a means of treating anxiety and depression.

/Not necessarily successfully.
 
Displayed 50 of 1354 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report