Do you have adblock enabled?
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 1346
    More: Interesting, semi-automatic rifle, semiautomatic pistols, federal assault weapons ban, Freedom Group, target shooting, Ayn Rand, car fire, long guns  
•       •       •

34435 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jan 2013 at 12:11 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1346 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-03 02:29:39 PM  

pedrop357: 'weapons of war that do NOT belong on the streets'


FTFM
 
2013-01-03 02:29:42 PM  
liberal logic
Reasonable:
lostcat: It makes me sick that I have to worry about my wife and/or daugther being randomly gunned down in the street by some lunatic stranger who is just having a bad day, or doesn't give a shiat about the world.


Irrational Paranoia:
Random gun owner: I carry a side arm to protect myself and my family from violent criminals
 
2013-01-03 02:29:49 PM  

mbillips: OK, not banned, regulated under the NFA. Which is fine, if it were up to me, any semi-auto with a detachable mag, and any mag over 10 rounds, would be an NFA item, available with a Form 3. Ditto .50 BMG weapons and the equivalent. I'd also make the feds start issuing machine-gun manufacture permits again, so I could get my PPSh working instead of being a demilled parts kit.


Why 10 rounds? What metric did you use to come up with this? Why not 11?
 
2013-01-03 02:30:30 PM  

tricycleracer: It's the SUV of guns


This statement is 100% accurate. Like an SUV, the AR is extremely versatile and comes in many different sizes and shapes depending on the job you want to do. Also like an SUV, no one "needs" an AR- but what does "need" have to do with anything? Do you "need" a big house? Why, because you have lots of kids? Do you "need" to have lots of kids and suck more resources out of our planet? Do you "need" that new iPhone that some poor bastard is assembling in a Foxconn prison camp?

I dont "need" to hear about how ARs kill so we shouldnt have them- our big houses and big SUVs and iPhones kill plenty of people, it just so happens that these people are in third world hovels and we cant see them.
 
2013-01-03 02:30:39 PM  
 
2013-01-03 02:30:40 PM  
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-03 02:30:52 PM  

pedrop357: Benjamin Orr: Yeah... Va Tech shooter reloaded several times (with 10 and 15 round magazines). Colombine shooters reloaded several times. Newtown shooter reloaded several times. Sikh temple shooter reloaded several times.

The Newtown shooter shot all the victims multiple times. Had he been limited to 10 round magazines, he either could have brought a lot of magazines OR only a few and conserved his ammo and accomplished the same thing. I doubt people would be any less forceful about using this shooting to push their agenda if only 10 kids and 6 teachers had died and 30 shots out of three 10 round magazines were fired.


So he would have had to reload a few more times? He fired over a hundred shots according to several sources.

Are you saying he would not have brought additional magazines? Are you saying that he would not have used the handguns if he ran out of AR15 ammo?
 
2013-01-03 02:31:14 PM  

lostcat: stiletto_the_wise: lostcat: It makes me sick that I have to worry about my wife and/or daugther being randomly gunned down in the street by some lunatic stranger who is just having a bad day, or doesn't give a shiat about the world.

The chances of that happening are miniscule--less than the chance that both your wife and daughter get struck by lightning at the exact same time.

We're talking orders of magnitude less than their very real chance of being killed in a car accident. I'd pick something better to worry about.

See, the difference is that if my daughter is killed in an accident, I know that it was an accident. No malice was intended.

If she were shot to death by a person who intened to harm her...for no reason...I can't abide that.


A) Still just as dead.
B) Death by carelessness seems even more cruel.
 
2013-01-03 02:31:36 PM  

Spade: ALC59: [i.imgur.com image 500x710]

Feinstein wants to ban the Mini-14 by name. And the M1 carbine.


M1 Carbine? Why?

Got a link to what that wench is pushing? I know she hates guns, did not know there was a list. I know my M1A will be banned as evil. Prices on em now are unreal.
 
2013-01-03 02:31:45 PM  

The Southern Dandy: DPXFP2: The AR-15 was designed to produce many casualties quickly, which is why law enforcement needs them and you do not.

What if Law Enforcement starts using them to round up people with Fark handles starting with DPX? What shall we use to defend the freedoms of DPXers?


By rushing squads of naked Southern Dandies at police sharpshooters. Isn't that the traditional solution?
 
2013-01-03 02:32:01 PM  

LasersHurt: This just in, people disagree on things.


They sure do, however the effictiveness of firearms can be judged objectively and the fact is an AR-14 is more effective. Like I mentioned, read the Fackler studies.
 
2013-01-03 02:32:13 PM  

abhorrent1: 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.

here it is

[img.poptower.com image 600x338]


you can use a hammer to stir eggs, also
 
2013-01-03 02:33:11 PM  

Boudica's War Tampon: The Southern Dandy: DPXFP2: The AR-15 was designed to produce many casualties quickly, which is why law enforcement needs them and you do not.

What if Law Enforcement starts using them to round up people with Fark handles starting with DPX? What shall we use to defend the freedoms of DPXers?

By rushing squads of naked Southern Dandies at police sharpshooters. Isn't that the traditional solution?


I'll admit, my gun is intimidating, but it wouldn't hurt a fly.
 
2013-01-03 02:33:20 PM  

ElBarto79: I'd be happy to leave gun owners alone if they were capable of leaving the rest of us alone and weren't constantly barging into our public spaces blasting everyone in sight.


And yet....gang members in CA and IL are still doing that, despite tough gun laws.
 
2013-01-03 02:33:26 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.


Nope, just ones with fixed or detachable magazines that handle more than 10 rounds. Which is......oh......a shiat ton of them.
 
2013-01-03 02:33:30 PM  

pedrop357: I always ask gun control supporters that sort of question when they say that "assault weapons" are 'weapons of war that do belong on the streets', or they claim that it's only good for killing large numbers of people or is only good for killing cops. They never have an answer as to why the police would still be able to have them.


Just to argue the point, your average beat cop doesn't spend nearly enough time on the range to be accurate with his service weapon. They have to carry them because the risk of running into someone else who is armed is so high in this country. If guns were rarer in this country, police could probably get away without routinely carrying them, like they do in some other countries.
 
2013-01-03 02:34:04 PM  

technicolor-misfit: 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.


media.fukung.net
 
2013-01-03 02:34:10 PM  

ha-ha-guy: a 300 pound monster with tusks


So , you met my mother-in-law. She hates guns. When I armed my family she made it clear she would not visit " if those things" were in the house. I had a gun cabinet placed in the foyer so it can't be missed.
 
2013-01-03 02:34:18 PM  

inner ted: Kit Fister: inner ted: 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."

Also, many people here in rural Utah use AR-15s as varmint control weapons. As the article states, a .223 cartridge is not ideal for large game hunting, but it is good for varmint control and a lot more flexible than a bolt-action rifle.

i also enjoy plinking & have done so with everything from .22 rifles & shotguns to a range of pistols & yes, even the holy grail of plinking - the ar15 - with all the bells and whistles (or should i say lasers and drum magazines)

so i feel qualified enough to say: bullshiat to your claim

the only reason guys want an ar - or any similar semi auto rifle with high magazine capacity - is to have more power. saying otherwise is just farking bullshiat.

if all you liked was the precision, then you could plink with any number of rifles

if all you liked was it's "scary black plastic" parts - as so many d-bags here like to say - then decorate a hunting rifle as needed

but that isn't the point is it? no... what makes it so great is that great big magazine and the ability to fire off that many rounds as fast as you can. (all the black plastic is just a bonus)

as to varmint control - if you can't do it with one of these:
[t3.gstatic.com image 459x110]
then you are doing it wrong
(note: i even included the real "scary" looking one - trying to make my point, but i doubt any will get it)
/hint: its the capacity of the magazine

Because a 22 Long Rifle will work perfectly for coyote and wild hogs, right?

so the only weapo ...


Actually, I am, and I do realize that .223 isn't the only caliber out there for that. In fact, I'm ordering a .300 BLK upper for my AR for Hogs and Yotes. That wasn't the point of my post.
 
2013-01-03 02:34:19 PM  
My .02 not that anyone asked. For disclosure I am a gun guy. Was born and raised with them, have a bunch, and I fear/respect them.

I just can't put the AR-15 in a defensive weapon category. Above anything else that weapon is an offensive weapon. People that say it is for home defense need to either tell the truth, re-evaluate their defensive strategy, or take some time to actually think about what they might be defending against and equip themselves accordingly.

If someone broke into my house at the same moment I was opening my gunsafe, literally the last weapon I would grab would be my M-4 (Remington 870 being the obvious first choice then actually move to one of my pistols if you were going to ask)
 
2013-01-03 02:34:39 PM  
From the farking article: "Its standard .223 caliber ammunition doesn't offer much stopping power for anything other than small game."

Sigh. .223 is NOT the only caliber available.
 
2013-01-03 02:35:28 PM  

Benjamin Orr: What kind of spread do you really think that a shotgun has? Especially at ranges inside of a house?


Guessing: 18" barrel, no choke, 20' to target... about 15" to 20"
 
2013-01-03 02:35:29 PM  
It is simple that this right has been woefully misinterpreted for decades. The "but it says so right there in the Constitution" is nonsense. It is a living document, with plenty of stuff in it we no longer need, like the 3rd Amendment and the whole returning slaves to their owners thingie. Literalists are tarded the world over, from sekrit muslins to paranoid Murricans. Your need and "right" to feel like a macho package does not trump the right of me to be relatively safe in a school.>


I/m certain that your Estrogen-laden response to my post will serve you well as you argue your opinion to the SCOTUS. Oh wait, that argument has already been made and failed with SCOTS affirm the right to bear arms. You're emotionally reacting to a purely analytical and point of fact. Well, as I said. Change the Constitution. It doesn't matter what you believe. Doesn't matter what I believe. Stop crying and biatching about your safety. If you think that any government will keep you safe, you're delusional. Here it is: If you give a shiat about it as much as you say you do, do something about it. Go ahead and see if you can change the Constitution. It really is that easy. They did it for civil rights, suffrage, etc.. or you can simply continue to be a gas bag here on Fark.
 
2013-01-03 02:35:31 PM  
I've never really had a desire to own an AR-15, but if they decide to ban them then I guess I'll have to lay down some money for a receiver.  Thanks a lot, assholes.
 
2013-01-03 02:35:38 PM  

ALC59: [i.imgur.com image 500x710]


"Okay, make that one illegal too."
 
2013-01-03 02:35:41 PM  

Noticeably F.A.T.: inner ted: simple

does the magazine hold more than 10 rounds?

if "yes" - then yes to both your questions

ta daa

What affect would that magazine size limitation do for that rifle? Would it affect it's performance in any significant way?


Yeah, it would force you to reload every 10 rounds, creating more opportunity to escape/fight back for spree victims. Kind of a minor change, but not nothing. The guy who murdered those people at the Unitarian Church in Knoxville got tackled because he used a shotgun and paused after emptying it.
 
2013-01-03 02:35:49 PM  

mbillips: You think revolvers are semi-automatic, and HE doesn't know what he's talking about? Semi-automatic means self-loading. Many revolvers are double-action, which is the term you're looking for that means you don't have to cock them before firing.


For the purpose of the argument, that is a pedantic distinction and you know it.
 
2013-01-03 02:37:05 PM  

aninconvenienterection: tricycleracer: It's the SUV of guns

This statement is 100% accurate. Like an SUV, the AR is extremely versatile and comes in many different sizes and shapes depending on the job you want to do. Also like an SUV, no one "needs" an AR- but what does "need" have to do with anything? Do you "need" a big house? Why, because you have lots of kids? Do you "need" to have lots of kids and suck more resources out of our planet? Do you "need" that new iPhone that some poor bastard is assembling in a Foxconn prison camp?

I dont "need" to hear about how ARs kill so we shouldnt have them- our big houses and big SUVs and iPhones kill plenty of people, it just so happens that these people are in third world hovels and we cant see them.


Also:
"A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and substantial reason' why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right's existence is all the reason he needs." - Woollard v Sheridan
 
2013-01-03 02:37:06 PM  

The_Sponge: ElBarto79: I'd be happy to leave gun owners alone if they were capable of leaving the rest of us alone and weren't constantly barging into our public spaces blasting everyone in sight.

And yet....gang members in CA and IL are still doing that, despite tough gun laws.


Its a good thing there aren't nearby states where those tough laws can be easily circumvented.
 
2013-01-03 02:37:17 PM  

dofus: Benjamin Orr: What kind of spread do you really think that a shotgun has? Especially at ranges inside of a house?

Guessing: 18" barrel, no choke, 20' to target... about 15" to 20"


.
Guess the spread of a pistol at any range.
 
2013-01-03 02:37:33 PM  

Spade: Gyrfalcon: Look, guys, the AR-15 is an ASSAULT RIFLE. Let's stop pretending it is anything but a military weapon with a few modifications that make it salable in the civilian market. Yes, you can use it to hunt, but it wasn't designed to do so. It is NOT a good home defense weapon, although it can be used to CLEAR a small area of intruders, because it was designed for that purpose. It was designed to fill a room with high-velocity shot by people who don't care that the rounds will go through the target, probably the walls, and likely anyone on the other side. Like, you know, in a military assault. Where the user is killing a roomful of the enemy and probably more in the next room. This makes it wrong for use in an apartment building, where the people in the next room are NOT the enemy.

Why do the Police use them?

Are cops regularly assaulting houses and spraying rounds everywhere, not caring where they end up?
Do cops not end up in apartment buildings where the people in the next room are not the enemy?


Maybe that's something we should take a look at.
Police don't use tasers correctly either.
 
2013-01-03 02:38:16 PM  

Spade: mbillips: OK, not banned, regulated under the NFA. Which is fine, if it were up to me, any semi-auto with a detachable mag, and any mag over 10 rounds, would be an NFA item, available with a Form 3. Ditto .50 BMG weapons and the equivalent. I'd also make the feds start issuing machine-gun manufacture permits again, so I could get my PPSh working instead of being a demilled parts kit.

Why 10 rounds? What metric did you use to come up with this? Why not 11?


Unless you're going to ban all semi-auto pistols, it's a reasonable, if arbitrary limitation for a self-defense weapon. I'd be OK with 5 rounds for center-fire rifles, and fixed mags only, but you'd get too much howling from AR shooters. Plus my Lee-Enfield would be out of compliance.
 
2013-01-03 02:38:32 PM  
An AR-15 makes a great hunting weapon, and it also makes a great home defense weapon.

Just because someone says they have a better weapon for those purposes doesn't mean the AR is not suitable.

It is much more accurate than the vast majority of weapons currently used for home defense.

Furthermore, the second amendment was not just designed for hunting and home defense. It's also meant to empower citizens for militia purposes.

I don't personally have an AR... they aren't worth the money to me. But I think those who talk about limiting freedom for security are hypocritical... they rarely talk about taking away freedom they personally enjoy.

We could ban homosexuality and limit the risk of AIDs. That would be incredibly irrational... most gay sex is not dangerous or irresponsible. We could omit Miranda rights and also use illegally obtained evidence to convict people we know are guilty. That would also be wrong. Giving up freedom for a little more security would be the path to tyranny.

Those who are afraid of crazies with guns should arm themselves. The solution to this problem is more guns. That's why these massacres almost always happen where there aren't any law abiding citizens with guns.
 
2013-01-03 02:38:36 PM  
So flipping what! If they are purchased LEGALLY, then I don't have a problem with it.
"oh, but what if a nut gets one". Well, Timothy McVeigh didn't use a gun, he used
ammonia, fuel oil, a large truck to take down a building....I don't see anyone trying to
ban those items. Just those "evil looking" guns.
And for the notion that "no one uses those for hunting". Tell me what line in the 2nd
amendment says ANYTHING about hunting? The 2nd amendment was NEVER about
hunting. It's about the ability of the average American, to DEFEND themselves against
someone entering their home, or to protect their property. Increasingly, it's not "the bad
boogie man" we need to worry about. It's the federal government!

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." (Thomas Jefferson Papers p. 334, 1950)
 
2013-01-03 02:39:05 PM  
Also from the farking article: ""I served in the military and the M16A2/M4 was the weapon I used for 20 years. It is first and foremost designed as an assault weapon platform, no matter what the spin. A hunter does not need a semi-automatic rifle to hunt, if he does he sucks, and should go play video games. I see more men running around the bush all cammo'd up with assault vests and face paint with tricked out AR's. These are not hunters but wannabe weekend warriors.""

20 years in the military and he usest he term "assault weapon"? Either the poster never served in the military or he is about as smart as a retarded rock. Either way his opinion is just that, his opinion. I know people who hunt with semi-automatic firearms, and they certainly do not suck. Nor do they blast away trying to take down their target. Do some people hunt that way? Sure. But so what? Just because some hunters might be fools or idiots does not mean that they all are.
 
2013-01-03 02:39:13 PM  

Magnanimous_J: mbillips: You think revolvers are semi-automatic, and HE doesn't know what he's talking about? Semi-automatic means self-loading. Many revolvers are double-action, which is the term you're looking for that means you don't have to cock them before firing.

For the purpose of the argument, that is a pedantic distinction and you know it.


Considering the gun nuts start half these threads with "its not a CLIP its a MAGAZINE!", I hardly think so.
 
2013-01-03 02:39:14 PM  

Wolf_Blitzer: The_Sponge: ElBarto79: I'd be happy to leave gun owners alone if they were capable of leaving the rest of us alone and weren't constantly barging into our public spaces blasting everyone in sight.

And yet....gang members in CA and IL are still doing that, despite tough gun laws.

Its a good thing there aren't nearby states where those tough laws can be easily circumvented.



So your solution is to take away the rights of people in those other states?  F*cking wonderful.
 
2013-01-03 02:39:27 PM  

Wolf_Blitzer: The_Sponge: ElBarto79: I'd be happy to leave gun owners alone if they were capable of leaving the rest of us alone and weren't constantly barging into our public spaces blasting everyone in sight.

And yet....gang members in CA and IL are still doing that, despite tough gun laws.

Its a good thing there aren't nearby states where those tough laws can be easily circumvented.


Yes, because if we ban guns in those states surely nothing bad will happen. Gun crime will surely go down just like it has in the UK, right?
 
2013-01-03 02:39:44 PM  

CPT Ethanolic: I haven't bought 7.26 rounds since the 90's so couldn't comment on prices today. I just remember that we'd go out with the AK, a 22 rifle, and a .38 when we went shooting, and the AK ammo always seemed crazy expensive compared to the rest. I bought my current 9mm for target practice because the .45 ammo was way too expensive to pop off a few hundred rounds at the range.


It's re-goddamn-diculous now. I was finding .45ACP for about 30¢ per round and 9mm for 19¢. Now the .45ACP is up to 80¢ and the 9mm is 45-50¢. And that's if anyone even has the stuff.

I don't know if the spike is just the short-term response to the panic buying or if this is the way it's going to be. I have one of each, as well as a .22 pistol and a .22 rifle which are still pretty cheap to feed, but it will make trips to the range fewer, that's for certain. i bought the 9mm for the same reason you did: much cheaper than the .45ACP.

If this keeps up it might make reloading cost- and time-effective. Or I'll just seal 'em up in grease and moisture-proof bags and bury them in the yard.
 
2013-01-03 02:39:47 PM  

Thunderpipes: I know my M1A will be banned as evil. Prices on em now are unreal.


I noticed they've jumped. I've been itching for one for years... I fear I may have waited too long.
 
2013-01-03 02:39:53 PM  

you have pee hands: When was the last time a major world power was overthrown from within by guerrilla fighters?



Seriously. I can't imagine a group of determined individuals using low-tech rifles and homemade explosives ever being able to cause any sort of difficulty for the American or Soviet militaries. Now that things like stealth bombers and SSBNs exist, asymmetric guerrilla resistance will never be able to deter a modern military!
 
2013-01-03 02:39:55 PM  
I'll get to that in a minute. I'm too busy talking about the kind of woman that has an abortion.
 
2013-01-03 02:40:28 PM  

What the Fark Wizzbang:

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

Nope, just ones with fixed or detachable magazines that handle more than 10 rounds. Which is......oh......a shiat ton of them.


Given that almost all normal sized pistols have magazines with more than ten rounds, this proposal is simply ignorant.

But I should be thankful. This makes sure a huge group of people are impacted by the gun control hysterics. If they were barring 20 round magazines, likely they would get away with it.
 
2013-01-03 02:40:33 PM  

mbillips: Noticeably F.A.T.: inner ted: simple

does the magazine hold more than 10 rounds?

if "yes" - then yes to both your questions

ta daa

What affect would that magazine size limitation do for that rifle? Would it affect it's performance in any significant way?

Yeah, it would force you to reload every 10 rounds, creating more opportunity to escape/fight back for spree victims. Kind of a minor change, but not nothing. The guy who murdered those people at the Unitarian Church in Knoxville got tackled because he used a shotgun and paused after emptying it.


The worst school shooting in the USA, VA Tech, the shooter reloaded several times, and the proposed ban wouldn't have applied to any of the weapons he used.
 
2013-01-03 02:40:36 PM  

dofus: Benjamin Orr: What kind of spread do you really think that a shotgun has? Especially at ranges inside of a house?

Guessing: 18" barrel, no choke, 20' to target... about 15" to 20"


Well... no choke usually means sawed off and needing a NFA tax stamp to be legal. So I guess you mean a modified/small choke. Assuming your generous estimates are correct and you are using birdshot... are you still saying you don't really need to aim?
 
2013-01-03 02:41:44 PM  

Mock26: 20 years in the military and he usest he term "assault weapon"? Either the poster never served in the military or he is about as smart as a retarded rock. Either way his opinion is just that, his opinion. I know people who hunt with semi-automatic firearms, and they certainly do not suck. Nor do they blast away trying to take down their target. Do some people hunt that way? Sure. But so what? Just because some hunters might be fools or idiots does not mean that they all are.


As evidenced by this thread, lots of people buy a certain gun just because its available, and then do something to self-justify the purchase. Some people hunt with large-caliber scoped handguns, that doesn't mean its very practical or close to being the best tool for the job.
 
2013-01-03 02:41:50 PM  

Benjamin Orr: So he would have had to reload a few more times? He fired over a hundred shots according to several sources.

Are you saying he would not have brought additional magazines? Are you saying that he would not have used the handguns if he ran out of AR15 ammo?


I wasn't arguing with you (I think), I don't think reducing magazine capacity will do anything to stop mass shootings.

Just adding to what I thought your point was by saying that the Newtown shooting is an even less relevant example of magazine capacity mattering. He reloaded at least 3 times that we know of, but used 30 round magazines. had he been limited to 10 round magazines, he may have had to being more OR simply been more conservative with his ammo. He shot most the victims multiple times, but could have resorted to 1 or 2 per victim and accomplished the same thing with 10 round magazines.
Mag capacity is meaningless for stopping shootings or even reducing their body county.

In a perfect (to them), gun-control-no-magazines-over-10-rounds-world, he brings 4x 10 round magazines in, shoots everyone twice and 'only' kills 20; 6 adults, 14 children. Or he shoots every other person twice and still manages 26. I think the gun control groups would just push more bans.
 
2013-01-03 02:41:55 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: My .02 not that anyone asked. For disclosure I am a gun guy. Was born and raised with them, have a bunch, and I fear/respect them.

I just can't put the AR-15 in a defensive weapon category. Above anything else that weapon is an offensive weapon. People that say it is for home defense need to either tell the truth, re-evaluate their defensive strategy, or take some time to actually think about what they might be defending against and equip themselves accordingly.

If someone broke into my house at the same moment I was opening my gunsafe, literally the last weapon I would grab would be my M-4 (Remington 870 being the obvious first choice then actually move to one of my pistols if you were going to ask)


Theres a ton of people coming back from the sandbox and applying for form 1s to make SBRs because the ar is the best platform for the job....and this is based on their CQB and room clearing experiences...some are even becoming instructors or professors of gunfighting and preaching this learned knowledge to students....spreading the word so to speak.

I'd rather take the word of a gunfighter than that of someone who wants to legislate something based on its color....or whether having a bayonet lug (on a rifle that fires a .223 caliber round at over 3000fps) makes the rifle more dangerous.
 
2013-01-03 02:42:17 PM  

aelat: I seriously don't get why anyone would tolerate a government that decides what videogames its citizens are allowed to play. Interesting how someone can question Americans' zealous fight over freedom from government while simultaneously allowing their own government to oppress them. To each his own, I guess.


Yeah, not having readily at hand the easiest means with which to blow my fellow citizens away at fifty times the rate of any other country and not being able to import video games like Rapelay from Japan is a real infringement of my human rights...

Reminds me of that time back in the early '80s when I watched "Raiders of the Lost Ark" in a Washington DC theatre and they cut out the scene where Indiana Jones shoots two sword-wielding guys because the locals were shooting each other willy-nilly.

Say, does that Michael "Magic" Jordan guy still play for the Washington Bullets?
 
2013-01-03 02:42:21 PM  
Holy Jesus. This is what Democrats are trying to do? This is BAD.

Link

Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms. The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein's new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.

This means a while bunch of currently legal firearms, semi-auto and even bolt action collectibles, will be illegal. Bayonet lug? Assault rifle.

Adopts new lists of prohibited external features.

more made illegal.

Requires owners of existing "assault weapons" to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE's permission to transport the firearm across state lines.

Good luck with that. A big fark you, and no.

Prohibits the transfer of "assault weapons." Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein's new bill, "assault weapons" would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.

Way to get rid of all weapons, when an owner dies, government takes them. You know how many vet bring back weapons would be confiscated? Many are family heirlooms and are worth many thousands of dollars.

Do you guys really think hauling legal gun owners in to be booked and fingerprinted and forced to pay money is a good idea? Really? I actually think this will cause you to lose votes. Even some Democrats I know won't accept this crap.
 
Displayed 50 of 1346 comments

First | « | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report