I saw a good analogy relating to a school playground where a bully picks up a rock and bounces it off the head of another student, then the solution was to provide rocks to all of the children so that they could defend themselves from future bullies. Reminds me of the NRA argument to arm everyone.
There was a report of one of those morons guarding a recruiting center with his assault rifle. What defense does this guy have against someone walking up to him with a concealed pistol and blowing his brains out? They just don't get it.
Excellent analogy.
Decent analogy. However if the bully has a rock why can't I have one to protect my family?
And please learn the definition of an assault weapon. Assault weapons have been banned since 1986 in the USA. The weapon you refer to is a semi automatic rifle, not a fully automatic weapon. Assault weapon was a term coined by anti gunners. Our troops have legit assault weapons, civilians do not. And what s wrong with the guy protecting a recruiting station with his rifle? It s evident that he really believes in what he s doing.
RG already spoke to the characteristics of an assault rifle so I won't bother regurgitating what makes an assault rifle distinct from your standard, long barrelled rifle.
As to the analogy... how about we remove the rocks from the playground so the bully can't pick one up?
What's wrong with a guy protecting a recruiting station? If the idiot is discharging his weapon by accident... I think you know what's wrong with such a situation. A meathead has no business taking his guns into the public if he doesn't know how to freaking use them (and there are lots of people who don't know how to use them).
And don't condescend. I grew up around guns. I owned guns. I hunted. I shot things. I fished. All in the interior of British Columbia- not at the local gun range. I don't do any of those things for my own reasons, however, I'd let you know I'm thinking of taking up fishing again.
I respect people who own 'hunting' rifles for pursuing their own game. For people who spend time deep in the bush, I even support their right to a handgun.
remove all the rocks?! the problem with that is that criminals will find a way to get those "rocks" and law abiding citizens will be defenseless.
i'm not sure how I condescended. Like yourself, I grew up around guns. I'm 37 now and started walking the fields with my dad around age 7 and started hunting at 10. i've done my fair share of hunting in very remote parts of new york and new jersey.
I am of the opinion that no civilian needs to own or purchase ANY miltitary grade weapon.
well civilians don't.....the military uses the military grade weapons we get the civilian grade weapons.
Then why does my uncle and thousands of other people own AR-14's and AK-47's?
Those are civilian grade weapons! The ar15 is civilians grade version of the m16. And the ak 47 s we have are nothing like what Isis uses. All of them are full auto. M16 s have grenade launchers on them, select fire....
I am of the opinion that no civilian needs to own or purchase ANY miltitary grade weapon.
well civilians don't.....the military uses the military grade weapons we get the civilian grade weapons.
Then why does my uncle and thousands of other people own AR-14's and AK-47's?
Those are civilian grade weapons! The ar15 is civilians grade version of the m16. And the ak 47 s we have are nothing like what Isis uses. All of them are full auto. M16 s have grenade launchers on them, select fire....
Those are military grade weapons designed for warfare. The BS gun nuts are trying to spew with semantics is ridiculous.
I am of the opinion that no civilian needs to own or purchase ANY miltitary grade weapon.
well civilians don't.....the military uses the military grade weapons we get the civilian grade weapons.
Then why does my uncle and thousands of other people own AR-14's and AK-47's?
Those are civilian grade weapons! The ar15 is civilians grade version of the m16. And the ak 47 s we have are nothing like what Isis uses. All of them are full auto. M16 s have grenade launchers on them, select fire....
Those are military grade weapons designed for warfare. The BS gun nuts are trying to spew with semantics is ridiculous.
I m a bull shit gun nut? Cool! However I m far from that. Yes i m in the nra but do believe in background checks and education before owning a gun. Back to "semantics", Ask any vet If the ar 15 you buy in cabelas is the same as the one as you use in the military. every vet i've talked to said the difference is like night and day. I use my ar15 for hunting (3 round clip), target shooting, home defense and competition. Ar 15 s are extremely accurate, reliable and popular. Over 3.5 million of them have been sold in the us so the chance of making them illegal is close to zero. and the us government says you can own an ar 15 but not a m16...see there is a difference because they are different weapons. the a k47 is much for reliable than the ar15 but I don't like that weapon because it has zero accuracy. I don't think I m playing semantics, rather I m using the correct definitions when talking about a subject I know a decent amount about. and what is your justification in not allowing citizens to own these guns? I own two m1 garands, both will do a hell of a lot more damage than an ar15. This gun pretty much helped us win world war 2. You are saying these should be illegal because the military used them? I have a 1943 mauser k98 used by nazi germany. it's a bolt action rifle used in world war 2....illegal? where does it stop? see the problem us gun nuts have? once you start making something illegal where does it end?
I am of the opinion that no civilian needs to own or purchase ANY miltitary grade weapon.
well civilians don't.....the military uses the military grade weapons we get the civilian grade weapons.
Then why does my uncle and thousands of other people own AR-14's and AK-47's?
Those are civilian grade weapons! The ar15 is civilians grade version of the m16. And the ak 47 s we have are nothing like what Isis uses. All of them are full auto. M16 s have grenade launchers on them, select fire....
Those are military grade weapons designed for warfare. The BS gun nuts are trying to spew with semantics is ridiculous.
I m a bull shit gun nut? Cool! However I m far from that. Yes i m in the nra but do believe in background checks and education before owning a gun. Back toy "semantics", Ask any vet If the ar 15 you buy in cabelas is the same as the one as you use in the military. I use my ar15 for hunting (3 round clip), target shooting, home defense amd competition. Ar 15 s are extremely accurate, reliable and popular. Over 3.5 million of them have been sold in the us so the chance of making them illegal is close to zero. Although not as reliable as an ak 47, I don't like that weapon because it has zero accuracy. I don't think I m playing semantics, rather I m using the correct definitions when talking about a subject I know a decent amount about.
What do you hunt with an AR-15? Just because the gun manufacturers take out the grenade launching capability does not make it suitable for civilian use. No civilian needs the capability to fire hundreds of round per minute. None.
I am of the opinion that no civilian needs to own or purchase ANY miltitary grade weapon.
well civilians don't.....the military uses the military grade weapons we get the civilian grade weapons.
Then why does my uncle and thousands of other people own AR-14's and AK-47's?
Those are civilian grade weapons! The ar15 is civilians grade version of the m16. And the ak 47 s we have are nothing like what Isis uses. All of them are full auto. M16 s have grenade launchers on them, select fire....
Those are military grade weapons designed for warfare. The BS gun nuts are trying to spew with semantics is ridiculous.
I m a bull shit gun nut? Cool! However I m far from that. Yes i m in the nra but do believe in background checks and education before owning a gun. Back toy "semantics", Ask any vet If the ar 15 you buy in cabelas is the same as the one as you use in the military. I use my ar15 for hunting (3 round clip), target shooting, home defense amd competition. Ar 15 s are extremely accurate, reliable and popular. Over 3.5 million of them have been sold in the us so the chance of making them illegal is close to zero. Although not as reliable as an ak 47, I don't like that weapon because it has zero accuracy. I don't think I m playing semantics, rather I m using the correct definitions when talking about a subject I know a decent amount about.
What do you hunt with an AR-15? Just because the gun manufacturers take out the grenade launching capability does not make it suitable for civilian use. No civilian needs the capability to fire hundreds of round per minute. None.
hundreds of rounds per minute? i'd love to see you try to do that. i mean changing the clip and everything...hundreds? no way. maybe 100 or so. and how many of them would be accurate? and christ your barrel would start to melt! lol but dude, i can shoot the same amount with my 9mm or my little ass .22. they all are semi automatic! so again...where does a ban stop? so my 9mm or .22 is now illegal because I technically could fire a hundred rounds per minute? the real question that i've always had is...how do we keep any weapon out of the hands of people who are not sane or have a criminal history. that's why i support finger printing, background checks, mental health history, personal references, employer phone calls, gun registration and education before purchasing any fire arm. (that's how why do it here in nj with the exception of a required safety course). what do I hunt with an ar-15? my father in law and I went wild boar hunting and that was the rifle I choose. Hopefully we are going again this year. I've used it deer hunting a few times but i'd rather use a bolt action 30.06. People also use an ar15 for prairie dogs and woodchuck.
Ok, you got me on the hundreds. I'll be sure go change my verbiage the next time to no civilian needs the capability to shoot a hundred rounds a minute. And how much accuracy do you really needs when you can fire that many rounds so quickly?
The ban could start with assault rifles that have the capacity to fire x amount of rounds per minute. Like ar-15's and AK-47's. From there, it could include magazine limits. So it could easily be worked out. But when the gun advocates (nuts) hear ban, they immediately assume the government will take away all of their guns. How about they just stop selling and producing any more for civilian use?
Is there not a way to register all guns and require a license similar to cars? Mist people ha e to take some sort of drivers ed before they get a driver's license. Why not a 2 or 3 day or week class on weapon safety?
These ideas are not infringing on anyones right to bear arms.
Ok, you got me on the hundreds. I'll be sure go change my verbiage the next time to no civilian needs the capability to shoot a hundred rounds a minute. And how much accuracy do you really needs when you can fire that many rounds so quickly?
The ban could start with assault rifles that have the capacity to fire x amount of rounds per minute. Like ar-15's and AK-47's. From there, it could include magazine limits. So it could easily be worked out. But when the gun advocates (nuts) hear ban, they immediately assume the government will take away all of their guns. How about they just stop selling and producing any more for civilian use?
Is there not a way to register all guns and require a license similar to cars? Mist people ha e to take some sort of drivers ed before they get a driver's license. Why not a 2 or 3 day or week class on weapon safety?
These ideas are not infringing on anyones right to bear arms.
That's where the real nuts go apeshit, because in dipshit land registration is the first step in confisccation.
Ok, you got me on the hundreds. I'll be sure go change my verbiage the next time to no civilian needs the capability to shoot a hundred rounds a minute. And how much accuracy do you really needs when you can fire that many rounds so quickly?
The ban could start with assault rifles that have the capacity to fire x amount of rounds per minute. Like ar-15's and AK-47's. From there, it could include magazine limits. So it could easily be worked out. But when the gun advocates (nuts) hear ban, they immediately assume the government will take away all of their guns. How about they just stop selling and producing any more for civilian use?
Is there not a way to register all guns and require a license similar to cars? Mist people ha e to take some sort of drivers ed before they get a driver's license. Why not a 2 or 3 day or week class on weapon safety?
These ideas are not infringing on anyones right to bear arms.
That's where the real nuts go apeshit, because in dipshit land registration is the first step in confisccation.
Ok, you got me on the hundreds. I'll be sure go change my verbiage the next time to no civilian needs the capability to shoot a hundred rounds a minute. And how much accuracy do you really needs when you can fire that many rounds so quickly?
The ban could start with assault rifles that have the capacity to fire x amount of rounds per minute. Like ar-15's and AK-47's. From there, it could include magazine limits. So it could easily be worked out. But when the gun advocates (nuts) hear ban, they immediately assume the government will take away all of their guns. How about they just stop selling and producing any more for civilian use?
Is there not a way to register all guns and require a license similar to cars? Mist people ha e to take some sort of drivers ed before they get a driver's license. Why not a 2 or 3 day or week class on weapon safety?
These ideas are not infringing on anyones right to bear arms.
you want to ban ar-15's, the most popular rifle in the united states? based on what reasoning? because they look scary and fire x amount of rounds per minute? by your reasoning you would want to ban every semi-automatic weapon in the us with a detachable clip. and you wonder why gun advocates would freak out? This is in total violation of the second amendment.
Let's check out some statistics. According to FBI statistics, in 2011 rifles were used in 323 murders (an ar-15 is a type of rifle so it's not even the whole total), 1694 murders were committed by knives/cutting instruments and 728 murders committed by hands,fists and knees. so please let's ban knives/cutting instruments first then all hands, fists and knees. We probably need to enact common sense laws banning the teaching of hand to hand combat techniques. These martial arts were developed for war and have no place on our streets.. by the way, Rifles account for about 2% of murders in the united states.
and I agree with you on registration of guns. That's what happens here in New Jersey; every gun you buy is immediately registered. To me not a big deal at all. And i'm all for firearms safety courses (i said all of this in a prior post). Safety courses, background checks and registration are the way to go; not banning guns.
Ok, you got me on the hundreds. I'll be sure go change my verbiage the next time to no civilian needs the capability to shoot a hundred rounds a minute. And how much accuracy do you really needs when you can fire that many rounds so quickly?
The ban could start with assault rifles that have the capacity to fire x amount of rounds per minute. Like ar-15's and AK-47's. From there, it could include magazine limits. So it could easily be worked out. But when the gun advocates (nuts) hear ban, they immediately assume the government will take away all of their guns. How about they just stop selling and producing any more for civilian use?
Is there not a way to register all guns and require a license similar to cars? Mist people ha e to take some sort of drivers ed before they get a driver's license. Why not a 2 or 3 day or week class on weapon safety?
These ideas are not infringing on anyones right to bear arms.
you want to ban ar-15's, the most popular rifle in the united states? based on what reasoning? because they look scary and fire x amount of rounds per minute? by your reasoning you would want to ban every semi-automatic weapon in the us with a detachable clip. and you wonder why gun advocates would freak out? This is in total violation of the second amendment.
Let's check out some statistics. According to FBI statistics, in 2011 rifles were used in 323 murders (an ar-15 is a type of rifle so it's not even the whole total), 1694 murders were committed by knives/cutting instruments and 728 murders committed by hands,fists and knees. so please let's ban knives/cutting instruments first then all hands, fists and knees. We probably need to enact common sense laws banning the teaching of hand to hand combat techniques. These martial arts were developed for war and have no place on our streets.. by the way, Rifles account for about 2% of murders in the united states.
and I agree with you on registration of guns. That's what happens here in New Jersey; every gun you buy is immediately registered. To me not a big deal at all. And i'm all for firearms safety courses (i said all of this in a prior post). Safety courses, background checks and registration are the way to go; not banning guns.
Not a great argument. You speak of common sense, but seem to have misplaced yours.
You could kill something with a pencil (designed for writing) or a hammer (designed for driving nails into wood) too. Any gun, however, is designed for blowing a hole in something and killing it. Don't you think that by design alone... we need to be careful what we manufacture and distribute to the public as a gun given their purpose?
I would never support a ban on hunting rifles (shotguns and high calibre long barrel rifles with small capacity magazines). I support a ban on assault rifles and strict ownership on handguns (the real problem in the gun world).
You seem to want to paint the AR15 as a puffcake. James Holmes and Adam Lanza demonstrated how effective that puffcake was for wreaking havoc. Do you think another incident like those ones isn't around the corner? Have we seen the last of the homicidal maniac bent on mass murder with a weapon designed to inflict mass murder in an urban area?
That pond of water was a classroom of elementary aged kids in one incident.
Arguing for guns is ridiculous. Your country will never give them up... so don't feel threatened- you will always have them and the problems that come with them. But don't waste your time trying to convince intelligent people that guns are not an issue- that's like trying to sell someone a piece of crap when they know better. By the way, I don't believe you actually answered the question that asked what you hunted with your AR15?
* Oh yeah... somewhere on these pages are the statistics that detail gun homicide rate in co-correlation to gun ownership amongst all countries (per capita of course). Did you know that your country is the most armed... and as a result yields the most gun homicides per annum? It's not even close. Your country aside, the correlation exists for all countries in nearly the same proportion- the more guns... the more deaths by guns.
Ok, you got me on the hundreds. I'll be sure go change my verbiage the next time to no civilian needs the capability to shoot a hundred rounds a minute. And how much accuracy do you really needs when you can fire that many rounds so quickly?
The ban could start with assault rifles that have the capacity to fire x amount of rounds per minute. Like ar-15's and AK-47's. From there, it could include magazine limits. So it could easily be worked out. But when the gun advocates (nuts) hear ban, they immediately assume the government will take away all of their guns. How about they just stop selling and producing any more for civilian use?
Is there not a way to register all guns and require a license similar to cars? Mist people ha e to take some sort of drivers ed before they get a driver's license. Why not a 2 or 3 day or week class on weapon safety?
These ideas are not infringing on anyones right to bear arms.
you want to ban ar-15's, the most popular rifle in the united states? based on what reasoning? because they look scary and fire x amount of rounds per minute? by your reasoning you would want to ban every semi-automatic weapon in the us with a detachable clip. and you wonder why gun advocates would freak out? This is in total violation of the second amendment.
Let's check out some statistics. According to FBI statistics, in 2011 rifles were used in 323 murders (an ar-15 is a type of rifle so it's not even the whole total), 1694 murders were committed by knives/cutting instruments and 728 murders committed by hands,fists and knees. so please let's ban knives/cutting instruments first then all hands, fists and knees. We probably need to enact common sense laws banning the teaching of hand to hand combat techniques. These martial arts were developed for war and have no place on our streets.. by the way, Rifles account for about 2% of murders in the united states.
and I agree with you on registration of guns. That's what happens here in New Jersey; every gun you buy is immediately registered. To me not a big deal at all. And i'm all for firearms safety courses (i said all of this in a prior post). Safety courses, background checks and registration are the way to go; not banning guns.
Not a great argument. You speak of common sense, but seem to have misplaced yours.
You could kill something with a pencil (designed for writing) or a hammer (designed for driving nails into wood) too. Any gun, however, is designed for blowing a hole in something and killing it. Don't you think that by design alone... we need to be careful what we manufacture and distribute to the public as a gun given their purpose?
I would never support a ban on hunting rifles (shotguns and high calibre long barrel rifles with small capacity magazines). I support a ban on assault rifles and strict ownership on handguns (the real problem in the gun world).
You seem to want to paint the AR15 as a puffcake. James Holmes and Adam Lanza demonstrated how effective that puffcake was for wreaking havoc. Do you think another incident like those ones isn't around the corner? Have we seen the last of the homicidal maniac bent on mass murder with a weapon designed to inflict mass murder in an urban area?
Ok, you got me on the hundreds. I'll be sure go change my verbiage the next time to no civilian needs the capability to shoot a hundred rounds a minute. And how much accuracy do you really needs when you can fire that many rounds so quickly?
The ban could start with assault rifles that have the capacity to fire x amount of rounds per minute. Like ar-15's and AK-47's. From there, it could include magazine limits. So it could easily be worked out. But when the gun advocates (nuts) hear ban, they immediately assume the government will take away all of their guns. How about they just stop selling and producing any more for civilian use?
Is there not a way to register all guns and require a license similar to cars? Mist people ha e to take some sort of drivers ed before they get a driver's license. Why not a 2 or 3 day or week class on weapon safety?
These ideas are not infringing on anyones right to bear arms.
you want to ban ar-15's, the most popular rifle in the united states? based on what reasoning? because they look scary and fire x amount of rounds per minute? by your reasoning you would want to ban every semi-automatic weapon in the us with a detachable clip. and you wonder why gun advocates would freak out? This is in total violation of the second amendment.
Let's check out some statistics. According to FBI statistics, in 2011 rifles were used in 323 murders (an ar-15 is a type of rifle so it's not even the whole total), 1694 murders were committed by knives/cutting instruments and 728 murders committed by hands,fists and knees. so please let's ban knives/cutting instruments first then all hands, fists and knees. We probably need to enact common sense laws banning the teaching of hand to hand combat techniques. These martial arts were developed for war and have no place on our streets.. by the way, Rifles account for about 2% of murders in the united states.
and I agree with you on registration of guns. That's what happens here in New Jersey; every gun you buy is immediately registered. To me not a big deal at all. And i'm all for firearms safety courses (i said all of this in a prior post). Safety courses, background checks and registration are the way to go; not banning guns.
Not a great argument. You speak of common sense, but seem to have misplaced yours.
You could kill something with a pencil (designed for writing) or a hammer (designed for driving nails into wood) too. Any gun, however, is designed for blowing a hole in something and killing it. Don't you think that by design alone... we need to be careful what we manufacture and distribute to the public as a gun given their purpose?
I would never support a ban on hunting rifles (shotguns and high calibre long barrel rifles with small capacity magazines). I support a ban on assault rifles and strict ownership on handguns (the real problem in the gun world).
You seem to want to paint the AR15 as a puffcake. James Holmes and Adam Lanza demonstrated how effective that puffcake was for wreaking havoc. Do you think another incident like those ones isn't around the corner? Have we seen the last of the homicidal maniac bent on mass murder with a weapon designed to inflict mass murder in an urban area?
I misplaced my common sense? How? By arguing with actually statistics as opposed to raw emotion? I consider myself very intelligent having earned two degrees and a masters in administration. If you actually read through my entire post you would have saw that I went wild boar and deer hunting with my ar15 and many people like to use that same rifle for woodchuck hunting. Again if you read through my entire post you would also have read that I was for all sorts of background checks, gun registration and education/safety classes before owning a gun. How is that not common sense? Because I don t agree with you that all sorts of weapons should be banned? And after those weapons are banned what is next? And I know our government won t take out weapons away; isn't the constitution a great thing?
Ok, you got me on the hundreds. I'll be sure go change my verbiage the next time to no civilian needs the capability to shoot a hundred rounds a minute. And how much accuracy do you really needs when you can fire that many rounds so quickly?
The ban could start with assault rifles that have the capacity to fire x amount of rounds per minute. Like ar-15's and AK-47's. From there, it could include magazine limits. So it could easily be worked out. But when the gun advocates (nuts) hear ban, they immediately assume the government will take away all of their guns. How about they just stop selling and producing any more for civilian use?
Is there not a way to register all guns and require a license similar to cars? Mist people ha e to take some sort of drivers ed before they get a driver's license. Why not a 2 or 3 day or week class on weapon safety?
These ideas are not infringing on anyones right to bear arms.
you want to ban ar-15's, the most popular rifle in the united states? based on what reasoning? because they look scary and fire x amount of rounds per minute? by your reasoning you would want to ban every semi-automatic weapon in the us with a detachable clip. and you wonder why gun advocates would freak out? This is in total violation of the second amendment.
Let's check out some statistics. According to FBI statistics, in 2011 rifles were used in 323 murders (an ar-15 is a type of rifle so it's not even the whole total), 1694 murders were committed by knives/cutting instruments and 728 murders committed by hands,fists and knees. so please let's ban knives/cutting instruments first then all hands, fists and knees. We probably need to enact common sense laws banning the teaching of hand to hand combat techniques. These martial arts were developed for war and have no place on our streets.. by the way, Rifles account for about 2% of murders in the united states.
and I agree with you on registration of guns. That's what happens here in New Jersey; every gun you buy is immediately registered. To me not a big deal at all. And i'm all for firearms safety courses (i said all of this in a prior post). Safety courses, background checks and registration are the way to go; not banning guns.
Yes. And I didn't say ban every semi automatic weapon. I said we could start with AK-47 and AR-15. Those are 2 weapons that no civilian needs to own. Those are military grade weapons designed for warfare. Not hunting. But I agree with thirty, the hand guns are the bigger problem. Many hand guns could fall into a ban if it fires x amount of rounds per minute. But some wouldn't. Magazines need to hold less rounds. Even for self defense purposes. In no way shape or form does that infringe on your right to bear arms.
Once again, let's not forget that the constitution was written during a time when the most powerful weapon known to man was a musket that took 3-4 minutes to reload if you were a marksman. If George Washington ever saw an AR-15 in some people's hands, he'd even say the second amendment needed tweeked.
I misplaced my common sense? How? By arguing with actually statistics as opposed to raw emotion? I consider myself very intelligent having earned two degrees and a masters in administration. If you actually read through my entire post you would have saw that I went wild boar and deer hunting with my ar15 and many people like to use that same rifle for woodchuck hunting. Again if you read through my entire post you would also have read that I was for all sorts of background checks, gun registration and education/safety classes before owning a gun. How is that not common sense? Because I don t agree with you that all sorts of weapons should be banned? And after those weapons are banned what is next? And I know our government won t take out weapons away; isn't the constitution a great thing?
I've heard of the AR15 used in boar hunting, but never for deer. The deer we used to hunt never allowed us to get that close. Killing woodchucks? Why? For fun (just to shoot shit)? You don't eat them do you? I'm not really down with that despite the fact they are considered a pest in our area.
I presented to you the positive correlation between gun ownership and gun homicide rates (per capita). The statistics are there as well, but I'm not going to present them here- I've already done that for others several times and to be frank... I'm growing weary of this discussion.
I have nothing against you personally, Gruff. You seem like a pretty good guy. Enjoy your guns. I'll keep my pessimistic view of US gun policies. And, as we remain divided on this issue... we can both enjoy Pearl Jam and the musical tastes we likely have in common.
So freedom of press is only covered for the printing press? rights don't change just because technology does. So if you think the founding fathers created the second amendment based on muskets, checkout district of Columbia vs heller. Case closed. And I still don't understand why a law abiding citizen such as myself can't own an ar-15 or ak47. Just because a few dozen people out of a country of over 300 million screwed up everyone should be punished? Hell let s bring back the 18th amendment since drunk driving is a real problem in this country.
I misplaced my common sense? How? By arguing with actually statistics as opposed to raw emotion? I consider myself very intelligent having earned two degrees and a masters in administration. If you actually read through my entire post you would have saw that I went wild boar and deer hunting with my ar15 and many people like to use that same rifle for woodchuck hunting. Again if you read through my entire post you would also have read that I was for all sorts of background checks, gun registration and education/safety classes before owning a gun. How is that not common sense? Because I don t agree with you that all sorts of weapons should be banned? And after those weapons are banned what is next? And I know our government won t take out weapons away; isn't the constitution a great thing?
I've heard of the AR15 used in boar hunting, but never for deer. The deer we used to hunt never allowed us to get that close. Killing woodchucks? Why? For fun (just to shoot shit)? You don't eat them do you? I'm not really down with that despite the fact they are considered a pest in our area.
I presented to you the positive correlation between gun ownership and gun homicide rates (per capita). The statistics are there as well, but I'm not going to present them here- I've already done that for others several times and to be frank... I'm growing weary of this discussion.
I have nothing against you personally, Gruff. You seem like a pretty good guy. Enjoy your guns. I'll keep my pessimistic view of US gun policies. And, as we remain divided on this issue... we can both enjoy Pearl Jam and the musical tastes we likely have in common.
Nothing personal here at all! I like debating but as soon as it gets nasty I back out. No need for that. I do enjoy my guns but know things need to change. I m a father of five and a middle school teacher. The last thing I would ever want to see is another newtown. That s why to me the key is: lots of background checks. Mental health background checks. Gun registration. Work and personal referrals. And a safety course before owning a gun. Oh and I ve never hunted for woodchucks; I learned at a very early age you never kill just to kill. Hopefully we can argue over some beers at global citizen festival!!! Be good. Mike
I misplaced my common sense? How? By arguing with actually statistics as opposed to raw emotion? I consider myself very intelligent having earned two degrees and a masters in administration. If you actually read through my entire post you would have saw that I went wild boar and deer hunting with my ar15 and many people like to use that same rifle for woodchuck hunting. Again if you read through my entire post you would also have read that I was for all sorts of background checks, gun registration and education/safety classes before owning a gun. How is that not common sense? Because I don t agree with you that all sorts of weapons should be banned? And after those weapons are banned what is next? And I know our government won t take out weapons away; isn't the constitution a great thing?
I've heard of the AR15 used in boar hunting, but never for deer. The deer we used to hunt never allowed us to get that close. Killing woodchucks? Why? For fun (just to shoot shit)? You don't eat them do you? I'm not really down with that despite the fact they are considered a pest in our area.
I presented to you the positive correlation between gun ownership and gun homicide rates (per capita). The statistics are there as well, but I'm not going to present them here- I've already done that for others several times and to be frank... I'm growing weary of this discussion.
I have nothing against you personally, Gruff. You seem like a pretty good guy. Enjoy your guns. I'll keep my pessimistic view of US gun policies. And, as we remain divided on this issue... we can both enjoy Pearl Jam and the musical tastes we likely have in common.
Nothing personal here at all! I like debating but as soon as it gets nasty I back out. No need for that. I do enjoy my guns but know things need to change. I m a father of five and a middle school teacher. The last thing I would ever want to see is another newtown. That s why to me the key is: lots of background checks. Mental health background checks. Gun registration. Work and personal referrals. And a safety course before owning a gun. Oh and I ve never hunted for woodchucks; I learned at a very early age you never kill just to kill. Hopefully we can argue over some beers at global citizen festival!!! Be good. Mike
30 Bills: "This beer is waaaay better than that last beer."
McScruffy: "I don't know, man. I kinda liked that last one."
So freedom of press is only covered for the printing press? rights don't change just because technology does. So if you think the founding fathers created the second amendment based on muskets, checkout district of Columbia vs heller. Case closed. And I still don't understand why a law abiding citizen such as myself can't own an ar-15 or ak47. Just because a few dozen people out of a country of over 300 million screwed up everyone should be punished? Hell let s bring back the 18th amendment since drunk driving is a real problem in this country.
What does Heller vs Columbia have to do with this? That has to do with the right to bring your gun home.
I misplaced my common sense? How? By arguing with actually statistics as opposed to raw emotion? I consider myself very intelligent having earned two degrees and a masters in administration. If you actually read through my entire post you would have saw that I went wild boar and deer hunting with my ar15 and many people like to use that same rifle for woodchuck hunting. Again if you read through my entire post you would also have read that I was for all sorts of background checks, gun registration and education/safety classes before owning a gun. How is that not common sense? Because I don t agree with you that all sorts of weapons should be banned? And after those weapons are banned what is next? And I know our government won t take out weapons away; isn't the constitution a great thing?
I've heard of the AR15 used in boar hunting, but never for deer. The deer we used to hunt never allowed us to get that close. Killing woodchucks? Why? For fun (just to shoot shit)? You don't eat them do you? I'm not really down with that despite the fact they are considered a pest in our area.
I presented to you the positive correlation between gun ownership and gun homicide rates (per capita). The statistics are there as well, but I'm not going to present them here- I've already done that for others several times and to be frank... I'm growing weary of this discussion.
I have nothing against you personally, Gruff. You seem like a pretty good guy. Enjoy your guns. I'll keep my pessimistic view of US gun policies. And, as we remain divided on this issue... we can both enjoy Pearl Jam and the musical tastes we likely have in common.
Nothing personal here at all! I like debating but as soon as it gets nasty I back out. No need for that. I do enjoy my guns but know things need to change. I m a father of five and a middle school teacher. The last thing I would ever want to see is another newtown. That s why to me the key is: lots of background checks. Mental health background checks. Gun registration. Work and personal referrals. And a safety course before owning a gun. Oh and I ve never hunted for woodchucks; I learned at a very early age you never kill just to kill. Hopefully we can argue over some beers at global citizen festival!!! Be good. Mike
30 Bills: "This beer is waaaay better than that last beer."
McScruffy: "I don't know, man. I kinda liked that last one."
30 Bills and McScruffy: "Mmmm. Beer."
Be good yourself, Gruff!
Lol! You too.
I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
0
Options
hedonist
standing on the edge of forever Posts: 24,524
I misplaced my common sense? How? By arguing with actually statistics as opposed to raw emotion? I consider myself very intelligent having earned two degrees and a masters in administration. If you actually read through my entire post you would have saw that I went wild boar and deer hunting with my ar15 and many people like to use that same rifle for woodchuck hunting. Again if you read through my entire post you would also have read that I was for all sorts of background checks, gun registration and education/safety classes before owning a gun. How is that not common sense? Because I don t agree with you that all sorts of weapons should be banned? And after those weapons are banned what is next? And I know our government won t take out weapons away; isn't the constitution a great thing?
I've heard of the AR15 used in boar hunting, but never for deer. The deer we used to hunt never allowed us to get that close. Killing woodchucks? Why? For fun (just to shoot shit)? You don't eat them do you? I'm not really down with that despite the fact they are considered a pest in our area.
I presented to you the positive correlation between gun ownership and gun homicide rates (per capita). The statistics are there as well, but I'm not going to present them here- I've already done that for others several times and to be frank... I'm growing weary of this discussion.
I have nothing against you personally, Gruff. You seem like a pretty good guy. Enjoy your guns. I'll keep my pessimistic view of US gun policies. And, as we remain divided on this issue... we can both enjoy Pearl Jam and the musical tastes we likely have in common.
Nothing personal here at all! I like debating but as soon as it gets nasty I back out. No need for that. I do enjoy my guns but know things need to change. I m a father of five and a middle school teacher. The last thing I would ever want to see is another newtown. That s why to me the key is: lots of background checks. Mental health background checks. Gun registration. Work and personal referrals. And a safety course before owning a gun. Oh and I ve never hunted for woodchucks; I learned at a very early age you never kill just to kill. Hopefully we can argue over some beers at global citizen festival!!! Be good. Mike
I love when debates (actually, the debaters themselves) come to this kind of place.
I was thinking the same thing.Mcgruff had valid points backed up by fact and as a gun owner myself,I think if we could Get the majority of gun owners to be down with all the legislation Mcgruff brought up with fingerprinting,backround checks etc it would be a smart step in the right direction.Ar-15 are only a problem in the movies .Crazys with multiple clips with a hand gun seem to be the big issue.Shit if you want max damage wouldn't a pump action shotgun with home defense shells that fragment be worse??? But no one is screaming about that stuff which you can get at any Dicks or Gander mtn? We do need some common sense changes and smart law abiding gun owners should be leading that charge IMO.
It's very interesting seeing the mindset that Americans have towards gun ownership. I am happy to see people like rr and mcgruff who encourage a red tape process to ownership. I just know that if I came across either one of them in the forest and they were carrying this "Ar-15" I would immediately shit myself thinking they were a psycho killer on the loose. There would be no time for talk, it would be run away as fast as you can and call the police. At the end of the day I would be wrong about my assumption but at first meet you couldn't blame me for thinking that. I guess in my world walking around with an Ar-15 is just not applicable.
It's very interesting seeing the mindset that Americans have towards gun ownership. I am happy to see people like rr and mcgruff who encourage a red tape process to ownership. I just know that if I came across either one of them in the forest and they were carrying this "Ar-15" I would immediately shit myself thinking they were a psycho killer on the loose. There would be no time for talk, it would be run away as fast as you can and call the police. At the end of the day I would be wrong about my assumption but at first meet you couldn't blame me for thinking that. I guess in my world walking around with an Ar-15 is just not applicable.
I appreciate the compliment and then the funny ass vision you left in my head lol. if you saw me in the forest i'd probably be with either my 68 year old father, 65 year old father in law or one of my five kids; hardly the look of a psycho killer. where in the world do you live? and trust me, in the state of new jersey if you are walking around with an ar-15 you are going to see some serious jail time.
It's very interesting seeing the mindset that Americans have towards gun ownership. I am happy to see people like rr and mcgruff who encourage a red tape process to ownership. I just know that if I came across either one of them in the forest and they were carrying this "Ar-15" I would immediately shit myself thinking they were a psycho killer on the loose. There would be no time for talk, it would be run away as fast as you can and call the police. At the end of the day I would be wrong about my assumption but at first meet you couldn't blame me for thinking that. I guess in my world walking around with an Ar-15 is just not applicable.
I appreciate the compliment and then the funny ass vision you left in my head lol. if you saw me in the forest i'd probably be with either my 68 year old father, 65 year old father in law or one of my five kids; hardly the look of a psycho killer. where in the world do you live? and trust me, in the state of new jersey if you are walking around with an ar-15 you are going to see some serious jail time.
I am your Northern neighbour buddy. And I really do mean to compliment your attitude towards gun ownership, good on you.
I was thinking the same thing.Mcgruff had valid points backed up by fact and as a gun owner myself,I think if we could Get the majority of gun owners to be down with all the legislation Mcgruff brought up with fingerprinting,backround checks etc it would be a smart step in the right direction.Ar-15 are only a problem in the movies .Crazys with multiple clips with a hand gun seem to be the big issue.Shit if you want max damage wouldn't a pump action shotgun with home defense shells that fragment be worse??? But no one is screaming about that stuff which you can get at any Dicks or Gander mtn? We do need some common sense changes and smart law abiding gun owners should be leading that charge IMO.
you make some really valid points. hand guns are easy as hell to conceal; ar-15's i guess are scary looking to some people but your chances of sneaking up on a crowd without anyone seeing you seems pretty hard. I'm not a hand gun person at all; it's the reason why I only have one. in time i'd like to buy a ww2 1911 like my grandfather carried during the war but something like that can wait. I wish more gun owners were sensible with background checks and mandatory safety classes. to me the only reason why you are against background checks is because you have something to hide. and totally agree with the shotgun....a 12 gauge with some 00 buckshot can do some nasty ass damage.
Comments
i'm not sure how I condescended. Like yourself, I grew up around guns. I'm 37 now and started walking the fields with my dad around age 7 and started hunting at 10. i've done my fair share of hunting in very remote parts of new york and new jersey.
The ar15 is civilians grade version of the m16. And the ak 47 s we have are nothing like what Isis uses. All of them are full auto. M16 s have grenade launchers on them, select fire....
Back to "semantics", Ask any vet If the ar 15 you buy in cabelas is the same as the one as you use in the military. every vet i've talked to said the difference is like night and day.
I use my ar15 for hunting (3 round clip), target shooting, home defense and competition. Ar 15 s are extremely accurate, reliable and popular. Over 3.5 million of them have been sold in the us so the chance of making them illegal is close to zero. and the us government says you can own an ar 15 but not a m16...see there is a difference because they are different weapons.
the a k47 is much for reliable than the ar15 but I don't like that weapon because it has zero accuracy.
I don't think I m playing semantics, rather I m using the correct definitions when talking about a subject I know a decent amount about.
and what is your justification in not allowing citizens to own these guns? I own two m1 garands, both will do a hell of a lot more damage than an ar15. This gun pretty much helped us win world war 2. You are saying these should be illegal because the military used them? I have a 1943 mauser k98 used by nazi germany. it's a bolt action rifle used in world war 2....illegal?
where does it stop? see the problem us gun nuts have? once you start making something illegal where does it end?
Just because the gun manufacturers take out the grenade launching capability does not make it suitable for civilian use. No civilian needs the capability to fire hundreds of round per minute. None.
the real question that i've always had is...how do we keep any weapon out of the hands of people who are not sane or have a criminal history. that's why i support finger printing, background checks, mental health history, personal references, employer phone calls, gun registration and education before purchasing any fire arm. (that's how why do it here in nj with the exception of a required safety course).
what do I hunt with an ar-15? my father in law and I went wild boar hunting and that was the rifle I choose. Hopefully we are going again this year. I've used it deer hunting a few times but i'd rather use a bolt action 30.06. People also use an ar15 for prairie dogs and woodchuck.
The ban could start with assault rifles that have the capacity to fire x amount of rounds per minute. Like ar-15's and AK-47's. From there, it could include magazine limits. So it could easily be worked out. But when the gun advocates (nuts) hear ban, they immediately assume the government will take away all of their guns. How about they just stop selling and producing any more for civilian use?
Is there not a way to register all guns and require a license similar to cars? Mist people ha e to take some sort of drivers ed before they get a driver's license. Why not a 2 or 3 day or week class on weapon safety?
These ideas are not infringing on anyones right to bear arms.
Let's check out some statistics. According to FBI statistics, in 2011 rifles were used in 323 murders (an ar-15 is a type of rifle so it's not even the whole total), 1694 murders were committed by knives/cutting instruments and 728 murders committed by hands,fists and knees. so please let's ban knives/cutting instruments first then all hands, fists and knees. We probably need to enact common sense laws banning the teaching of hand to hand combat techniques. These martial arts were developed for war and have no place on our streets.. by the way, Rifles account for about 2% of murders in the united states.
and I agree with you on registration of guns. That's what happens here in New Jersey; every gun you buy is immediately registered. To me not a big deal at all. And i'm all for firearms safety courses (i said all of this in a prior post). Safety courses, background checks and registration are the way to go; not banning guns.
You could kill something with a pencil (designed for writing) or a hammer (designed for driving nails into wood) too. Any gun, however, is designed for blowing a hole in something and killing it. Don't you think that by design alone... we need to be careful what we manufacture and distribute to the public as a gun given their purpose?
I would never support a ban on hunting rifles (shotguns and high calibre long barrel rifles with small capacity magazines). I support a ban on assault rifles and strict ownership on handguns (the real problem in the gun world).
You seem to want to paint the AR15 as a puffcake. James Holmes and Adam Lanza demonstrated how effective that puffcake was for wreaking havoc. Do you think another incident like those ones isn't around the corner? Have we seen the last of the homicidal maniac bent on mass murder with a weapon designed to inflict mass murder in an urban area?
This guy shows how effective the AR15 is:
That pond of water was a classroom of elementary aged kids in one incident.
Arguing for guns is ridiculous. Your country will never give them up... so don't feel threatened- you will always have them and the problems that come with them. But don't waste your time trying to convince intelligent people that guns are not an issue- that's like trying to sell someone a piece of crap when they know better. By the way, I don't believe you actually answered the question that asked what you hunted with your AR15?
* Oh yeah... somewhere on these pages are the statistics that detail gun homicide rate in co-correlation to gun ownership amongst all countries (per capita of course). Did you know that your country is the most armed... and as a result yields the most gun homicides per annum? It's not even close. Your country aside, the correlation exists for all countries in nearly the same proportion- the more guns... the more deaths by guns.
It's really that simple. Deny it all you want.
Fuck that. You need this weapon to pond fish if anything, those fuckers are fast.
If you actually read through my entire post you would have saw that I went wild boar and deer hunting with my ar15 and many people like to use that same rifle for woodchuck hunting.
Again if you read through my entire post you would also have read that I was for all sorts of background checks, gun registration and education/safety classes before owning a gun. How is that not common sense? Because I don t agree with you that all sorts of weapons should be banned? And after those weapons are banned what is next?
And I know our government won t take out weapons away; isn't the constitution a great thing?
Once again, let's not forget that the constitution was written during a time when the most powerful weapon known to man was a musket that took 3-4 minutes to reload if you were a marksman. If George Washington ever saw an AR-15 in some people's hands, he'd even say the second amendment needed tweeked.
I presented to you the positive correlation between gun ownership and gun homicide rates (per capita). The statistics are there as well, but I'm not going to present them here- I've already done that for others several times and to be frank... I'm growing weary of this discussion.
I have nothing against you personally, Gruff. You seem like a pretty good guy. Enjoy your guns. I'll keep my pessimistic view of US gun policies. And, as we remain divided on this issue... we can both enjoy Pearl Jam and the musical tastes we likely have in common.
And I still don't understand why a law abiding citizen such as myself can't own an ar-15 or ak47. Just because a few dozen people out of a country of over 300 million screwed up everyone should be punished? Hell let s bring back the 18th amendment since drunk driving is a real problem in this country.
I do enjoy my guns but know things need to change. I m a father of five and a middle school teacher. The last thing I would ever want to see is another newtown. That s why to me the key is: lots of background checks. Mental health background checks. Gun registration. Work and personal referrals. And a safety course before owning a gun.
Oh and I ve never hunted for woodchucks; I learned at a very early age you never kill just to kill.
Hopefully we can argue over some beers at global citizen festival!!! Be good.
Mike
McScruffy: "I don't know, man. I kinda liked that last one."
30 Bills and McScruffy: "Mmmm. Beer."
Be good yourself, Gruff!
Cheers to you both - have a great Sunday.
.Crazys with multiple clips with a hand gun seem to be the big issue.Shit if you want max damage wouldn't a pump action shotgun with home defense shells that fragment be worse??? But no one is screaming about that stuff which you can get at any Dicks or Gander mtn?
We do need some common sense changes and smart law abiding gun owners should be leading that charge IMO.
I am happy to see people like rr and mcgruff who encourage a red tape process to ownership.
I just know that if I came across either one of them in the forest and they were carrying this "Ar-15" I would immediately shit myself thinking they were a psycho killer on the loose.
There would be no time for talk, it would be run away as fast as you can and call the police.
At the end of the day I would be wrong about my assumption but at first meet you couldn't blame me for thinking that.
I guess in my world walking around with an Ar-15 is just not applicable.
where in the world do you live? and trust me, in the state of new jersey if you are walking around with an ar-15 you are going to see some serious jail time.
And I really do mean to compliment your attitude towards gun ownership, good on you.
I wish more gun owners were sensible with background checks and mandatory safety classes. to me the only reason why you are against background checks is because you have something to hide.
and totally agree with the shotgun....a 12 gauge with some 00 buckshot can do some nasty ass damage.