Ban the AR-15 from Civilian Ownership :-O

[NarcissisticDeity]

Tim allow me to teach you the difference between Pre-ban ( Pre Assault Weapons Ban 1994 ) and Post Ban. Here's what a bunch of ignorant morons like you decided they wanted to ban from the AR15 in 1994

Flash hider - No AR15 in an " Assault Weapons Ban " configuration can have a flash hider , they can have muzzle brakes though , does this make the rifle any less lethal? NO

Bayonet lug - Yes alas you can't attach a bayonet to your AR15 post ban    because before the ban the was an apparent rash of people killing other people via bayonets   

Collapsible butt stocks -  Does this reduce the rifles effectiveness? lol Their rational was they could make the rifle " concealable " LMAO I shit you not 

At the same time they banned magazines over 10 rounds , however millions and millions of pre-ban  30 round magazines were made from the early 60s on so they're in abundance and cheap ( relatively speaking ) and that's it. Some states have slightly different " bans " like Cali and the absurd " bullet button " but that's the gist of it

The " Assault Weapons Ban " NEVER completely banned the rifle , just cosmetic features , the rate of fire is EXACTLY the same , it accomplished NOTHING and another new " ban " would do the same. We had people like you before making up these arbitrary rules based on fear and ignorance , maybe now you can grasp why law abiding citizens scoff at a new ban and people of your ilk deciding what we need and what we don't.

[_aj_]

Yet there are 100 times more mass shootings in the US than in any other country.  Propose a solution.  Or just state that it's collateral damage we have to live with for you to own your toys.

Your stat is false. But if it were true, they are all collateral damage we have to live with to be free.

But, please, PLEASE ban guns. I do want to get this civil war over with. It should only take us a couple of weeks to mop you useless fools up.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Yet there are 100 times more mass shootings in the US than in any other country.  Propose a solution.  Or just state that it's collateral damage we have to live with for you to own your toys.

Tim , there is NO " solution " you just want to change the tools the killers will use. What will be your excuse then? Okay no more " mass shootings " but mass bombings , congrats Tim.

Stop projecting as well , I don't view guns as " toys " I view them as tools and they come with a great responsibility.

You're exactly like those Evangelical Christian Bigots Tim that use to label all gay men as pedophiles who will molest your children , They did so out of fear & ignorance and lumped all gay men in with those monsters , Now you're lumping every law abiding citizen in with these monsters , congrats Tim. You're almost as bigoted as they are.

[chaos]

I have my opinion: there is no place for assault weapons in a civilized society. But I know banning all guns is not going to happen.  Other countries have regulations of one sort or another, and don't have the mass shootings we do.  We can do something about this problem.

Can you define what exactly an assault weapon is?

[polychronopolous]

Tim , there is NO " solution " you just want to change the tools the killers will use. What will be your excuse then? Okay no more " mass shootings " but mass bombings , congrats Tim.

Stop projecting as well , I don't view guns as " toys " I view them as tools and they come with a great responsibility.

You're exactly like those Evangelical Christian Bigots Tim that use to label all gay men as pedophiles who will molest your children , They did so out of fear & ignorance and lumped all gay men in with those monsters , Now you're lumping every law abiding citizen in with these monsters , congrats Tim. You're almost as bigoted as they are.

The guy uses his regressive leftist beliefs in the same manner.

There really is very little difference between the two.

[chaos]

The guy uses his regressive leftist beliefs in the same manner.

There really is very little difference between the two.

Funny that a guy that fights for his "right" to marry another man wants so vehemently to strip others of their rights.

[NarcissisticDeity]

The guy uses his regressive leftist beliefs in the same manner.

There really is very little difference between the two.

Absolutely , cut from the same cloth. Guns are like abortions , don't want one , don't get one. Fuck you telling me I can't have one. Try and take away their right to choose LMAO

[timfogarty]

Tim , there is NO " solution " you just want to change the tools the killers will use. What will be your excuse then? Okay no more " mass shootings " but mass bombings , congrats Tim.

I'm saying nothing about the people who enjoy owning assault weapons. I'm saying these machines are falling into the hands of people who should not have access to them, mentally disturbed people.  This guy was a nut case.  The last one was a nut case.  The one before was, the one before that.  (there has not been a terrorist attack on US soil by a foreign nationalist since 9/11)

Bombs are already illegal to own.  So are air to air missiles, bazookas, hand grenades, sarin gas, etc.  You agree that some weapons can be banned.  The only disagreement we have is where to draw the line.  (Note that every time I specify assault weapon (for me, that would be any weapon that can fire off dozens of rounds in a few seconds), you say gun, as if I'm saying we should try now to ban hand guns.  I am not.)

Bombs are hard to make.  You try to buy the materials, odds are you'll get a visit from law enforcement.  Assault weapons are easy to get.  Crazy people seem to be able to get buy them legally left and right.   It would probably be pretty for a crazy person to get the materials to make a bomb without the authorities finding him first.

[NarcissisticDeity]

You want to see the true carnage of half a billion guns in the hands of a hundred million patriots? Please, please "ban guns". I'm begging you. Do it, fags. Let's see what you've really got. Let's get it the fuck on.

That's the thing , they want to ban guns to end gun violence and then they need guys with guns to do the violence on their behalf. Their solution creates a bigger mess than ever.

 

[polychronopolous]

Funny that a guy that fights for his "right" to marry another man wants so vehemently to strip others of their rights.

They are tyrannical radicals no different than the supposed boogeyman christians they criticize(because god forbid you would ever criticize a muslim, despite the stonings, death by burnings, throwing off buildings, mass executions etc etc).

The great thing about modern day and the internet is we can all have a good hearty laugh and mock their dogmatic stupidity.

[Pray_4_War]

Lol, It's a fucked up world we live in right now.

[tonymctones]

(Note that every time I specify assault weapon (for me, that would be any weapon that can fire off dozens of rounds in a few seconds), you say gun, as if I'm saying we should try now to ban hand guns.  I am not.)

The issue is Tim you seriously are ignorant about guns. You say that you don't want to ban hand guns but you also say you want to ban any weapon that can fire off dozens of rounds in a second.

A semi automatic hand gun is going to fire as many rounds a second as a semi automatic rifle.

You don't even understand what you're saying

[NarcissisticDeity]

I'm saying nothing about the people who enjoy owning assault weapons. I'm saying these machines are falling into the hands of people who should not have access to them, mentally disturbed people.  This guy was a nut case.  The last one was a nut case.  The one before was, the one before that.  (there has not been a terrorist attack on US soil by a foreign nationalist since 9/11)

Bombs are already illegal to own.  So are air to air missiles, bazookas, hand grenades, sarin gas, etc.  You agree that some weapons can be banned.  The only disagreement we have is where to draw the line.  (Note that every time I specify assault weapon (for me, that would be any weapon that can fire off dozens of rounds in a few seconds), you say gun, as if I'm saying we should try now to ban hand guns.  I am not.)

Bombs are hard to make.  You try to buy the materials, odds are you'll get a visit from law enforcement.  Assault weapons are easy to get.  Crazy people seem to be able to get buy them legally left and right.   It would probably be pretty for a crazy person to get the materials to make a bomb without the authorities finding him first.

I'm saying nothing about the people who enjoy owning assault weapons. I'm saying these machines are falling into the hands of people who should not have access to them, mentally disturbed people.  This guy was a nut case.  The last one was a nut case.  The one before was, the one before that.  (there has not been a terrorist attack on US soil by a foreign nationalist since 9/11)

I agree anyone who can murder people indiscriminately is mentally ill. How do we prevent them from getting legal weapons? That's the dilemma. Improved mental health screening? How would that work out with HIPAA laws? Convict people of thought crimes? And Tim you called for another Assault Weapons Ban so you did say something about people who enjoy owning them.

Bombs are already illegal to own.  So are air to air missiles, bazookas, hand grenades, sarin gas, etc.  You agree that some weapons can be banned.  The only disagreement we have is where to draw the line.  (Note that every time I specify assault weapon (for me, that would be any weapon that can fire off dozens of rounds in a few seconds), you say gun, as if I'm saying we should try now to ban hand guns.  I am not.)

Tim hand guns can fire off dozens or rounds in a few seconds. Note picture 33 round Glock magazine fits in any Glock 9MM pistol

Bombs are hard to make.  You try to buy the materials, odds are you'll get a visit from law enforcement.  Assault weapons are easy to get.  Crazy people seem to be able to get buy them legally left and right.   It would probably be pretty for a crazy person to get the materials to make a bomb without the authorities finding him first.

Actually they're not. Most households already have most of the ingredients to make them. Tim McVeigh 

 

[TuHolmes]

Funny that a guy that fights for his "right" to marry another man wants so vehemently to strip others of their rights.

I find this accurate.

The 2nd amendment is a law that was specifically put in place to stop tyranny... Including tyranny keeping adults from marrying the other adult that they choose.

[timfogarty]

Actually they're not. Most households already have most of the ingredients to make them. Tim McVeigh  

Sorry.  It took weeks of planning (and probably a lot of help) for Timothy McVeigh to fill the back of a rental van with fertilizer

[calfzilla]

Man, those look scary!!! I wouldn't step within 56 feet of one of those weapons!!

Not sure if serious.

[mr.turbo]

hmm so where are all you guys with guns rising up against tyranny?

or are we considered tyranny free at the present time?

 

 

[tonymctones]

Sorry.  It took weeks of planning (and probably a lot of help) for Timothy McVeigh to fill the back of a rental van with fertilizer

Guess that makes the families of those he killed feel better, "at least it wasn't a spur of the moment killing!!!"

[SF1900]

hmm so where are all you guys with guns rising up against tyranny?

or are we considered tyranny free at the present time?

 

 

I heard, but do not quote me on this, that Branch Warren is rounding up a bunch of weightlifters and getbiggers (notice how I don't consider getbiggers to be people who actually lift weights, hence not lumping them in with weightlifters), in order to form an army that will fight tyranny. They are ready.

[TuHolmes]

hmm so where are all you guys with guns rising up against tyranny?

or are we considered tyranny free at the present time?

 

 

Government is slow to attempt to over reach specifically because of the guns.

Tyranny free? Sure. You can say that if it helps you understand.

[TheShape.]

Any Europeans posting here should just stop, you never know the constitutional freedom of being able to defend yourself. How did that gun control work in France again?

[timfogarty]

hmm so where are all you guys with guns rising up against tyranny?

or are we considered tyranny free at the present time?

 

Have you seen the extent of the militarization of the police here?  Rising up against that will have to be an orange revolution

[calfzilla]

Any Europeans posting here should just stop, you never know the constitutional freedom of being able to defend yourself. How did that gun control work in France again?

X2

[SF1900]

Any Europeans posting here should just stop, you never know the constitutional freedom of being able to defend yourself. How did that gun control work in France again?

So, two people from different countries cannot engage in a debate with each other?    If someone can come up with an intellectual, well-thought out argument, it doesn't matter if they live in Europe. Facts are fact, no matter where they come from. You either have a strong argument or you don't, independent of your geographical location. You're using emotions such as "You don't understand" or "You're not American." Again, if the argument is well laid out and the facts are strong, who cares where it comes from.   The argument should be able to "stand on its own two feet" no matter who is stating it. That's all the matters. If it doesn't, it should be discarded, and a new hypothesis should be generated.

[TheShape.]

So, two people from different countries cannot engage in a debate with each other?    If someone can come up with an intellectual, well-thought out argument, it doesn't matter if they live in Europe. Facts are fact, no matter where they come from. You either have a strong argument or you don't, independent of your geographical location. You're using emotions such as "You don't understand" or "You're not American." Again, if the argument is well laid out and the facts are strong, who cares where it comes from.   The argument should be able to "stand on its own two feet" no matter who is stating it. That's all the matters. If it doesn't, it should be discarded, and a new hypothesis should be generated.

We shouldn't take opinions seriously from others who are completely destroying their countries with mass immigration and Orwellian laws. If they had their shit together maybe they would be worth listening to.