AR-15 inventor would be horrified and sickened.

[chemteach]

The 2nd Amendment is in the Bill of Rights. Not the Bill of Needs or Wants. The AR platform is an affordable, dependable, tried and tested, and effective weapon. Whether a person chooses the AR for sport, food-gathering or defense is a personal decision and none of my business. Nuff said.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Miss the quotes around "friend"? He's advocating the same intellectually dishonest points anti-gun zealots use, on a pro-gun site. That doesn't sound very friendly to me.

He's probably an OK guy but his tone is definitely adversarial towards unadulterated support of the 2A

 

[Drail]

I think the inventors of the U.S. Constitution would be horrified and sickened by the current State of the Union and the attitude of our "leaders".

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I think the inventors of the U.S. Constitution would be horrified and sickened by the current State of the Union and the attitude of our "leaders".

Yeah. And when they'd see many of the peoples' cavalier and acquiescent attitude about allowing their rights to erode away they'd probably think to themselves----"Told ya so!"

 

[KG1]

I can't afford to give up my firearms. However, I have said that if properly compensated, I would abide by a ban, just as the Australians did.

Let's Make A Deal. I'll give you proper compensation if you give me your rights. What would you do If they did'nt offer you proper compensation? Would you only abide by a ban if you were properly compensated to do so?

 

[KLB]

Likely because of that whole ESCALATION OF LETHALITY issue I keep bringing up. Someone found out how to turn a plane into a guided missile, so as to kill hundreds/thousands vs. tens/hundreds.

Then why does anyone NEED a jet that carries so much fuel, or so many people? Only two of the incidents were planes killing others(9/11), the others were just crashing planes on purpose.

Why does anyone NEED fertilizer that can so easily be turned into a bomb and can kill and injure hundreds?

 

[jamil]

If it were voluntary, hey, what the heck. You wanna sell your rights, that's on you. But you don't get to sell mine.

 

[KG1]

If it were voluntary, hey, what the heck. You wanna sell your rights, that's on you. But you don't get to sell mine.

Yeah. I suppose anyone is free to give up their own rights if they wish to do so. I'll not follow. I'll not be shamed into giving them up either.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

If it were voluntary, hey, what the heck. You wanna sell your rights, that's on you. But you don't get to sell mine.

Yeah. I suppose anyone is free to give up their own rights if they wish to do so. I'll not follow. I'll not be shamed into giving them up either.

Unfortunately, there are those that think they've cleverly coined some terms to demonize inanimate objects and generate a belief they need to be controlled and regulated, they are quite comfortable in voting away those rights for you.

 

[KLB]

There's also the fact there is no universally accepted definition of what constitutes "arms" under the 2nd. Perhaps the Founders meant ONLY those 2 things at your shoulders, or perhaps ONLY knives. People also ignore the "well-regulated militia" part of the 2nd all the time, yet I don't hear much argument about that.

No, the 9th didn't rule on open carry. Damn those pesky activist judges for keeping their decision so damn NARROW! HOW DARE THEY!!

BTW, I suspect you consider a judge to be "activist" when it's a decision with which you do not agree. Otherwise, that judge is an "Originalist" or "Strict Constructionist" (as if any judge can keep their personal beliefs out of a ruling).

I suggest you read this and watch this
[video=youtube;P4zE0K22zH8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4zE0K22zH8[/video]

 

[printcraft]

You apparently don't understand that "rights" have limits. Again, no hate speech allowed. Free speech as the FIRST thing the Founders wanted to protect, but others have imposed limits on that right. So, why not the 2nd?

My issue about "need" is simply this: is there something you can do with an AR that you CANNOT do with another firearm? As I've stated before, I can't shoot a bolt-action rifle anymore because it's too damn painful. However, I can shoot the same round with an AR and not suffer pain (or, at least it's not as bad). Now, before all the "he but not me" cries, I'd be fine with the same operational restrictions of a bolt-action for that AR: a slower cycling (possibly a mechanism to require the use of the charging handle after each shot), as well as a 5-round internal magazine. I suspect neither is beyond the skills of an engineer to create.

In my case, I "need" an AR because the FUNDAMENTAL DESIGN (inline barrel, BCG and buffer) allows me to shoot without pain. What is your "need"?



There's also the fact there is no universally accepted definition of what constitutes "arms" under the 2nd. Perhaps the Founders meant ONLY those 2 things at your shoulders, or perhaps ONLY knives. People also ignore the "well-regulated militia" part of the 2nd all the time, yet I don't hear much argument about that.

No, the 9th didn't rule on open carry. Damn those pesky activist judges for keeping their decision so damn NARROW! HOW DARE THEY!!

BTW, I suspect you consider a judge to be "activist" when it's a decision with which you do not agree. Otherwise, that judge is an "Originalist" or "Strict Constructionist" (as if any judge can keep their personal beliefs out of a ruling).

So YOU need an AR. Ok.

When you go on your killing spree make sure to post to Facebook. Thanks.

 

[KG1]

So YOU need an AR. Ok.

When you go on your killing spree make sure to post to Facebook. Thanks.

Yeah and you're cool if you say ISIS inspired you. The Obama administration will cover your six.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Apparently 20 round magazines should be OK. Since they were invented by the time of the 2A and the founders didn't have to "envision" it nor did they thought it necessary to forbid the obvious escalation of whatever.

This Repeating 20 Round Rifle Was Invented 12 Years BEFORE Second Amendment Was Ratified

 

[jamil]

Unfortunately, there are those that think they've cleverly coined some terms to demonize inanimate objects and generate a belief they need to be controlled and regulated, they are quite comfortable in voting away those rights for you.

Weapon of war. Death machine. Military grade weapon. Assault rifle. Exploding bullets. Spraying bullets.

Speaking of spraying bullets, I saw the video of that Kunt guy. Kuntzman. whatever. In the video, he really shot that thing very erratically. Like he was trying to push the limits of how fast he could pull the trigger. The muzzle was all over the place. It didn't occur to me until later when I heard a media source refer to ARs as "spraying bullets", that Kuntzman was likely trying as hard as he could to get the thing to actually spray bullets for the camera.

It's very intellectually dishonest to make claims about something you know absolutely nothing about, especially when trying to affect public opinion about it. And it's obvious he didn't know anything about what he was saying. So what should we say about people who DO know about guns, and say those same things, perpetuating the straw monster?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Weapon of war. Death machine. Military grade weapon. Assault rifle. Exploding bullets. Spraying bullets.

Speaking of spraying bullets, I saw the video of that Kunt guy. Kuntzman. whatever. In the video, he really shot that thing very erratically. Like he was trying to push the limits of how fast he could pull the trigger. The muzzle was all over the place. It didn't occur to me until later when I heard a media source refer to ARs as "spraying bullets", that Kuntzman was likely trying as hard as he could to get the thing to actually spray bullets for the camera.

It's very intellectually dishonest to make claims about something you know absolutely nothing about, especially when trying to affect public opinion about it. And it's obvious he didn't know anything about what he was saying. So what should we say about people who DO know about guns, and say those same things, perpetuating the straw monster?

They're sadly misguided.

 

[jamil]

They're sadly misguided.

I'd use stronger words. They're more than simply misguided. If you know better and you still perpetuate a lie, there's a word for that.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I'd use stronger words. They're more than simply misguided. If you know better and you still perpetuate a lie, there's a word for that.

Does it have the root word with the letters L-I-and-E in it?

 

[jamil]

Does it have the root word with the letters L-I-and-E in it?

Why yes. Yes it does.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Does it have the root word with the letters L-I-and-E in it?

And people who so do for the purpose of subverting constitutional rights should be tried, convicted, and experience H-E-M-P R-O-P-E for being domestic E-N-E-M-I-E-S.

 

[JettaKnight]

In my case, I "need" an AR because the FUNDAMENTAL DESIGN (inline barrel, BCG and buffer) allows me to shoot without pain. What is your "need"?

Now this thread turned comical.


This is SOOOOO "typical liberal": Rules for me are different than rules for you.