|
AR-15 rifles
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:23:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/23/2018 3:48 PM, John H. wrote: On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:58:08 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/23/2018 2:31 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: Bill wrote: True North wrote: On Friday, 23 February 2018 12:36:05 UTC-4, Bill wrote: True North wrote: On Thursday, 22 February 2018 21:58:50 UTC-4, Its Me wrote: snip... If you want to lessen the ability of sick people to do these types of mass shootings, you'll have to strip all firearms from the US. Every long gun, pistol, shotgun... everything. It'll take decades. snip... Bingo! Now you're finally talking sense...didn't know y'all had it in you. Simple fact...too many Americans just can't be trusted with firearms so the rest of y'all have to suffer for the common good. How about you and your firearm? Been a few school shootings and even a major knife attack in your lands. Get rid of firearms and knives. Oh yeah, ban rental trucks, they have been used to mow down pedestrians not in the street. It is a breakdown of society. I'll have to parrot Mr Luddite and Harry here. The main purpose of a rental truck is to move things...the main purpose of all your guns is to kill things. Get it? The main purpose of the 2nd amendment is to keep government in check. That’s a laugh. It meant it then according to the SCOTUS .... or at least they *think* that's what it meant. Obviously the meaning has been debated for years. Certainly doesn't apply in today's age but why ruin 38 percent of the population's wet dreams? In today's age we have deviants who will go into schools and kill kids. The main purpose of the 2d Amendment, in my opinion, is to ensure the right of the people to bear arms is not infringed. Amen. Well, that opens up the age old debate, but your opinion is as good as anyone else's. Only issue I have with your opinion is you have left out the reason *why* the founding father's deemed it a right. I think they just picked a reason that sounded good. They could have said 'for hunting' or 'for personal protection'. The reason could be done away with. How many of the other amendments have a 'justification' clause. |
AR-15 rifles
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:40:15 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/23/18 2:42 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/23/2018 2:11 PM, Bill wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/23/2018 8:01 AM, John H. wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 22:59:44 -0500, wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 14:14:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/22/2018 1:21 PM, wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 11:33:58 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 2/22/18 11:24 AM, wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 08:57:24 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 2/21/18 9:51 PM, wrote: Everyone still seems to avoid the fact that this is a kid problem, not a gun problem. When I was in K-12 lots of kids had easy access to guns. We were hunting at 14 and this was within a mile of the DC line, not wyoming. Nobody shot anyone. It was not even in our wildest scope of thought. It is a societal problem, exacerbated by the easy availability of most high-powered firearms. Even in Maryland, there is no state background check for a long gun, or even a waiting period. You just have to be 21. And, of course, a long gun sale from one private owner to another in this state doesn't require any state paperwork. Tell you a secret. I got rid of my "high-powered" rifles, the Colt and the Ruger, because they bored me. Basically, my target shooting is limited to 100 yards unless I want to take a 2-1/2 hour drive out to the Shenandoah. I don't need superfast, superloud .223 rounds and their expense and noise to hit easily hit dead .targets at 100 yards or less. A .22LR, a 9 mm, or a .357 MAG will do that job nicely. That is simply rationalizing. Plenty of mass shootings have happened with 9mms, usually pistols but your assault rifle would do just fine. The "military style" thing is really a red herring. Your CZ is certainly "military style" and they will sell you a tactical style stock for just about anything. You can certainly make a very "military" looking weapon out of a Mini14 or even a 10-22. What part is "rationalizing"? The AR-15 is the school shoot up weapon of choice. Any idiot can buy a long gun privately in many parts of this country without any background check or waiting period. I didn't mention "military style." You did. Richard is stuck on the military thing, along with most of the left. Yes, I am sure some moron can shoot up a school with a CZ Scorpion, but a $900 9mm rifle is not a weapon of choice for that sort of "fun." If that is what they had, that is what they would use. The Columbine boys used a similar Hi Point carbine. I am not stuck on the "military thing".* The military should have the most lethal weapons available. I am stuck on military type AR-15s available for civilian purchase because they have a record of being the weapons of choice for these mass shootings more often than not.** I don't know why they hold such a fascination for nut cases who want to go kill a bunch of people but they do.* Maybe it's because they are cheap, heavily marketed and available as you have pointed out. === I think the high capacity magazines have a lot to do with it, along with relatively small size, high power and reliability. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com I'd have no problem with outlawing them also. Again, I don't think it would be effective, but it would be 'perceived' as taking action. More than a ineffective perception, it might be the start of an awareness that not all guns are suitable or designed for civilian recreational use.* It could be the beginning of a more rational attitude about firearms without risking 2nd Amendment "rights".* I know this offends many here but I can't think of a legitimate use of a AK-15 style rifle by recreational shooters other than they are "COOL" to have and the government, in the interest of the rest of the population, can't do a damn thing about having one ... or two... or three. The 2nd amendment was not for hunting. Oh yeah.* It was for a well regulated militia.* If you think that refers to national defense, I guess we can save a lot of money and do away with the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard. If you interpret that as being a state's right to protect against an army raised and supported by a tyrannical national government as most 2nd Amendment orientalists (and gun nuts) believe to mean, it really doesn't matter. If the US Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard were ever taken over by a tyrannical national government and turned against the states and the "well regulated militia"* I don't think the fight would last long. What part of "well-regulated" applies to today's rabble of NRA nutsies who are not in the armed forces, national guard or police or similar governmental entities? Even if one accepts the concept of "militia" loosely, that is, just a body of citizenry, there is no real regulation of that militia. Even the kids in the Red Dawn movie "regulated" themselves by training together. Each state has its National Guard, which is pretty damn regulated. Volunteers could be called upon by the governor, if the need arose, and trained in short manner by the Guard forces. |
AR-15 rifles
On 2/23/2018 4:49 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:23:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/23/2018 3:48 PM, John H. wrote: On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:58:08 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/23/2018 2:31 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: Bill wrote: True North wrote: On Friday, 23 February 2018 12:36:05 UTC-4, Bill wrote: True North wrote: On Thursday, 22 February 2018 21:58:50 UTC-4, Its Me wrote: snip... If you want to lessen the ability of sick people to do these types of mass shootings, you'll have to strip all firearms from the US. Every long gun, pistol, shotgun... everything. It'll take decades. snip... Bingo! Now you're finally talking sense...didn't know y'all had it in you. Simple fact...too many Americans just can't be trusted with firearms so the rest of y'all have to suffer for the common good. How about you and your firearm? Been a few school shootings and even a major knife attack in your lands. Get rid of firearms and knives. Oh yeah, ban rental trucks, they have been used to mow down pedestrians not in the street. It is a breakdown of society. I'll have to parrot Mr Luddite and Harry here. The main purpose of a rental truck is to move things...the main purpose of all your guns is to kill things. Get it? The main purpose of the 2nd amendment is to keep government in check. That’s a laugh. It meant it then according to the SCOTUS .... or at least they *think* that's what it meant. Obviously the meaning has been debated for years. Certainly doesn't apply in today's age but why ruin 38 percent of the population's wet dreams? In today's age we have deviants who will go into schools and kill kids. The main purpose of the 2d Amendment, in my opinion, is to ensure the right of the people to bear arms is not infringed. Amen. Well, that opens up the age old debate, but your opinion is as good as anyone else's. Only issue I have with your opinion is you have left out the reason *why* the founding father's deemed it a right. I think they just picked a reason that sounded good. They could have said 'for hunting' or 'for personal protection'. The reason could be done away with. How many of the other amendments have a 'justification' clause. Ah, but there was much debate about including the 2nd Amendment from the Bill of Rights. Some argued against it. Some argued for it. For a clearer understanding of what was on their wig covered minds, read the two Militia Acts of 1792. The first gives the president the authority to call up the state militias in the event of an attack or invasion by a foreign adversary or Indian tribe. The second Act establishes conscription and, to some, defines what a "well regulated militia" was in their minds. It defines ages, (white men only originally), the requirement supply and maintain your own musket, powder, ball, knapsack, etc, all of which were not at government expense. |
AR-15 rifles
On 2/23/2018 4:40 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/23/18 2:42 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/23/2018 2:11 PM, Bill wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/23/2018 8:01 AM, John H. wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 22:59:44 -0500, wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 14:14:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/22/2018 1:21 PM, wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 11:33:58 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 2/22/18 11:24 AM, wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 08:57:24 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 2/21/18 9:51 PM, wrote: Everyone still seems to avoid the fact that this is a kid problem, not a gun problem. When I was in K-12 lots of kids had easy access to guns. We were hunting at 14 and this was within a mile of the DC line, not wyoming. Nobody shot anyone. It was not even in our wildest scope of thought. It is a societal problem, exacerbated by the easy availability of most high-powered firearms. Even in Maryland, there is no state background check for a long gun, or even a waiting period. You just have to be 21. And, of course, a long gun sale from one private owner to another in this state doesn't require any state paperwork. Tell you a secret. I got rid of my "high-powered" rifles, the Colt and the Ruger, because they bored me. Basically, my target shooting is limited to 100 yards unless I want to take a 2-1/2 hour drive out to the Shenandoah. I don't need superfast, superloud .223 rounds and their expense and noise to hit easily hit dead .targets at 100 yards or less. A .22LR, a 9 mm, or a .357 MAG will do that job nicely. That is simply rationalizing. Plenty of mass shootings have happened with 9mms, usually pistols but your assault rifle would do just fine. The "military style" thing is really a red herring. Your CZ is certainly "military style" and they will sell you a tactical style stock for just about anything. You can certainly make a very "military" looking weapon out of a Mini14 or even a 10-22. What part is "rationalizing"? The AR-15 is the school shoot up weapon of choice. Any idiot can buy a long gun privately in many parts of this country without any background check or waiting period. I didn't mention "military style." You did. Richard is stuck on the military thing, along with most of the left. Yes, I am sure some moron can shoot up a school with a CZ Scorpion, but a $900 9mm rifle is not a weapon of choice for that sort of "fun." If that is what they had, that is what they would use. The Columbine boys used a similar Hi Point carbine. I am not stuck on the "military thing".Â* The military should have the most lethal weapons available. I am stuck on military type AR-15s available for civilian purchase because they have a record of being the weapons of choice for these mass shootings more often than not.Â*Â* I don't know why they hold such a fascination for nut cases who want to go kill a bunch of people but they do.Â* Maybe it's because they are cheap, heavily marketed and available as you have pointed out. === I think the high capacity magazines have a lot to do with it, along with relatively small size, high power and reliability. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com I'd have no problem with outlawing them also. Again, I don't think it would be effective, but it would be 'perceived' as taking action. More than a ineffective perception, it might be the start of an awareness that not all guns are suitable or designed for civilian recreational use.Â* It could be the beginning of a more rational attitude about firearms without risking 2nd Amendment "rights".Â* I know this offends many here but I can't think of a legitimate use of a AK-15 style rifle by recreational shooters other than they are "COOL" to have and the government, in the interest of the rest of the population, can't do a damn thing about having one ... or two... or three. The 2nd amendment was not for hunting. Oh yeah.Â* It was for a well regulated militia.Â* If you think that refers to national defense, I guess we can save a lot of money and do away with the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard. If you interpret that as being a state's right to protect against an army raised and supported by a tyrannical national government as most 2nd Amendment orientalists (and gun nuts) believe to mean, it really doesn't matter. If the US Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard were ever taken over by a tyrannical national government and turned against the states and the "well regulated militia"Â* I don't think the fight would last long. What part of "well-regulated" applies to today's rabble of NRA nutsies who are not in the armed forces, national guard or police or similar governmental entities? Even if one accepts the concept of "militia" loosely, that is, just a body of citizenry, there is no real regulation of that militia. Even the kids in the Red Dawn movie "regulated" themselves by training together. "Regulated" did not have the same meaning then as we understand it to mean today. That's the root of the controversy. |
AR-15 rifles
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:42:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: If the US Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard were ever taken over by a tyrannical national government and turned against the states and the "well regulated militia" I don't think the fight would last long. === I believe you're wrong about that. It would end up being a classic case of asymmetric warfare, and could easily last longer than the war in Afghanistan, much longer. You can't fight guerilla warfare with tanks, jets and atomic bonbs. It's also doubtful that the US military would have much stomach for fighting their brothers, cousins, aunts and uncles. The big coastal cities where a large percentage of the population resides are incredibly vulnerable to even minor disruptions to their infrastructure. All hell would break loose, literally. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
AR-15 rifles
On 2/23/2018 4:40 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/23/18 2:42 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/23/2018 2:11 PM, Bill wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/23/2018 8:01 AM, John H. wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 22:59:44 -0500, wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 14:14:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/22/2018 1:21 PM, wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 11:33:58 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 2/22/18 11:24 AM, wrote: On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 08:57:24 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 2/21/18 9:51 PM, wrote: Everyone still seems to avoid the fact that this is a kid problem, not a gun problem. When I was in K-12 lots of kids had easy access to guns. We were hunting at 14 and this was within a mile of the DC line, not wyoming. Nobody shot anyone. It was not even in our wildest scope of thought. It is a societal problem, exacerbated by the easy availability of most high-powered firearms. Even in Maryland, there is no state background check for a long gun, or even a waiting period. You just have to be 21. And, of course, a long gun sale from one private owner to another in this state doesn't require any state paperwork. Tell you a secret. I got rid of my "high-powered" rifles, the Colt and the Ruger, because they bored me. Basically, my target shooting is limited to 100 yards unless I want to take a 2-1/2 hour drive out to the Shenandoah. I don't need superfast, superloud .223 rounds and their expense and noise to hit easily hit dead .targets at 100 yards or less. A .22LR, a 9 mm, or a .357 MAG will do that job nicely. That is simply rationalizing. Plenty of mass shootings have happened with 9mms, usually pistols but your assault rifle would do just fine. The "military style" thing is really a red herring. Your CZ is certainly "military style" and they will sell you a tactical style stock for just about anything. You can certainly make a very "military" looking weapon out of a Mini14 or even a 10-22. What part is "rationalizing"? The AR-15 is the school shoot up weapon of choice. Any idiot can buy a long gun privately in many parts of this country without any background check or waiting period. I didn't mention "military style." You did. Richard is stuck on the military thing, along with most of the left. Yes, I am sure some moron can shoot up a school with a CZ Scorpion, but a $900 9mm rifle is not a weapon of choice for that sort of "fun." If that is what they had, that is what they would use. The Columbine boys used a similar Hi Point carbine. I am not stuck on the "military thing".Â* The military should have the most lethal weapons available. I am stuck on military type AR-15s available for civilian purchase because they have a record of being the weapons of choice for these mass shootings more often than not.Â*Â* I don't know why they hold such a fascination for nut cases who want to go kill a bunch of people but they do.Â* Maybe it's because they are cheap, heavily marketed and available as you have pointed out. === I think the high capacity magazines have a lot to do with it, along with relatively small size, high power and reliability. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com I'd have no problem with outlawing them also. Again, I don't think it would be effective, but it would be 'perceived' as taking action. More than a ineffective perception, it might be the start of an awareness that not all guns are suitable or designed for civilian recreational use.Â* It could be the beginning of a more rational attitude about firearms without risking 2nd Amendment "rights".Â* I know this offends many here but I can't think of a legitimate use of a AK-15 style rifle by recreational shooters other than they are "COOL" to have and the government, in the interest of the rest of the population, can't do a damn thing about having one ... or two... or three. The 2nd amendment was not for hunting. Oh yeah.Â* It was for a well regulated militia.Â* If you think that refers to national defense, I guess we can save a lot of money and do away with the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard. If you interpret that as being a state's right to protect against an army raised and supported by a tyrannical national government as most 2nd Amendment orientalists (and gun nuts) believe to mean, it really doesn't matter. If the US Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard were ever taken over by a tyrannical national government and turned against the states and the "well regulated militia"Â* I don't think the fight would last long. What part of "well-regulated" applies to today's rabble of NRA nutsies who are not in the armed forces, national guard or police or similar governmental entities? Even if one accepts the concept of "militia" loosely, that is, just a body of citizenry, there is no real regulation of that militia. Even the kids in the Red Dawn movie "regulated" themselves by training together. So did Bill Murray and John Candy in "Stripes". :-) |
AR-15 rifles
|
AR-15 rifles
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 17:28:25 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: Hell, today the checks and balances of government want to impeach a president for having an alleged affair with some bimbo 11 years ago as a private citizen. === That's just politics as a blood sport which large numbers of people seem to enjoy. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
AR-15 rifles
On Friday, 23 February 2018 16:35:11 UTC-4, John H wrote:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:38:18 -0800 (PST), True North wrote: On Friday, 23 February 2018 12:36:05 UTC-4, Bill wrote: True North wrote: On Thursday, 22 February 2018 21:58:50 UTC-4, Its Me wrote: snip... If you want to lessen the ability of sick people to do these types of mass shootings, you'll have to strip all firearms from the US. Every long gun, pistol, shotgun... everything. It'll take decades. snip... Bingo! Now you're finally talking sense...didn't know y'all had it in you. Simple fact...too many Americans just can't be trusted with firearms so the rest of y'all have to suffer for the common good. How about you and your firearm? Been a few school shootings and even a major knife attack in your lands. Get rid of firearms and knives. Oh yeah, ban rental trucks, they have been used to mow down pedestrians not in the street. It is a breakdown of society. I'll have to parrot Mr Luddite and Harry here. The main purpose of a rental truck is to move things...the main purpose of all your guns is to kill things. Get it? We would expect you to parrot Harry. That's why you get paid. You'd be much better off parroting Ludite more often. You wouldn't be such an ass. And you're wrong. The main purpose of my guns is not to kill things. 'Purpose' resides with the owner, not the implement. Get it? BTW, what page of your bowrider manual says not to ride in the bow? Does it make you feel more important when you call other posters names? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com