Banning AR-15s

[Anonymous]

Weird how only 1 of 6 mass shootings this weekend involved an ar-15 and only one got substantial media coverage

[Anonymous]

Conservatives scream about loss of "family values" and dangerous books in schools, but are totally cool with sending holiday cards of their entire family holding guns, or ads with toddlers holding guns like this one.

[Anonymous]

Jefferson wanted the constitution rewritten every 19 years. If you think about it - that would be pretty cool. We could also get rid of stupid poorly written amendments.

But he was in France getting laid and no one went for his idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting opinion piece (written by former police officer) about why it's crazy we let civilians buy AR-15s.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/05/opinions/guns-ar-15-uvalde-school-shooting-fanone/index.html

its a civilian firearm . Or can you show us which military uses the AR-15?

That is true.

Moreover the legal standard is: “in common use.” Re-read Heller / McDonald if you doubt that fact.

It would not be factually honest to argue the AR15 is not in common use in the United States in 2023.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Conservatives scream about loss of "family values" and dangerous books in schools, but are totally cool with sending holiday cards of their entire family holding guns, or ads with toddlers holding guns like this one.

That's pretty f'd up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Weird how only 1 of 6 mass shootings this weekend involved an ar-15 and only one got substantial media coverage

https://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/3-killed-in-racially-motivated-shooting-at-dollar-general-store-in-florida-sheriff-says/

[Anonymous]

Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses

It's all going to be banned in the future. Enjoy it now while you can. Go kill something. This isn't going to be the status quo into perpetuity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one has talked about “family values” since 1985, grandma.

Except you.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3519071-republicans-pitch-religious-family-values-as-gun-violence-solution/

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republican-lawmaker-introduces-fidelity-month-bill-hopes-rededicate-us-core-values

https://www.foxnews.com/media/traditional-values-disappearing-american-culture-young-people-taught-america-bad-country

https://www.foxnews.com/media/laura-ingraham-wonder-kids-come-home-questioning-familys-values-beliefs

https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/sheriff-mark-lamb-calls-attack-traditional-values-america-has-fix-that

https://wcfcourier.com/news/local/government-politics/ron-desantis-campaign-cedar-falls-farmers-family/article_b7ca12ec-3522-11ee-9549-0307ad9a5761.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses

I care about rifle wounds because they are most difficult to survive, especially for kids. Working in healthcare, it's very clear people survive handgun wounds (unless to brain/heart of course) far easier than rifle wounds.

I care about guns in general because even if criminals turn to knives, at least I won't have to check my sleeping child anymore to ensure a bullet didn't penetrate their window (and yes, I've had to check my sleeping child due to gun shots in my alley and know of neighbors who found bullets that penetrated windows). At least fewer bystanders caught in targeted drive by shootings; you have to be up close and personal to get a knife wound in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses

I'm guessing you're still planning to arrive at your point. What more about firearms do they need to understand?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses

I care about rifle wounds because they are most difficult to survive, especially for kids. Working in healthcare, it's very clear people survive handgun wounds (unless to brain/heart of course) far easier than rifle wounds.

I care about guns in general because even if criminals turn to knives, at least I won't have to check my sleeping child anymore to ensure a bullet didn't penetrate their window (and yes, I've had to check my sleeping child due to gun shots in my alley and know of neighbors who found bullets that penetrated windows). At least fewer bystanders caught in targeted drive by shootings; you have to be up close and personal to get a knife wound in.

you realize musket wounds are even worse? If you survive the shot you died of infection due to the low velocity and all the germs on the clothing that entered the wound . Also you saY nobodody is banning hunting rifles. But now you oppose rifles period. So you want people to hunt with handguns? What do you actually want?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting opinion piece (written by former police officer) about why it's crazy we let civilians buy AR-15s.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/05/opinions/guns-ar-15-uvalde-school-shooting-fanone/index.html

Idiot troll-thread from the resident crazy-lady.

Ignore.

Sure, ignore the problem (one of many)

The Constitution is a problem to you??

Oye veh! You are even more insane than I already thought.

The Constitution famously does not mention AR-15s.

Correct. And what happens in the future when technology advances even more? What if future guns are like laser guns (think: star wars light sabers). That are just able to vaporize a human in a split second. Will we still bring up "the constitution" and "2nd amendment rights"?? When will the insanity end?!?

You’re not really a Star Wars fan are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses

I care about rifle wounds because they are most difficult to survive, especially for kids. Working in healthcare, it's very clear people survive handgun wounds (unless to brain/heart of course) far easier than rifle wounds.

I care about guns in general because even if criminals turn to knives, at least I won't have to check my sleeping child anymore to ensure a bullet didn't penetrate their window (and yes, I've had to check my sleeping child due to gun shots in my alley and know of neighbors who found bullets that penetrated windows). At least fewer bystanders caught in targeted drive by shootings; you have to be up close and personal to get a knife wound in.

you realize musket wounds are even worse? If you survive the shot you died of infection due to the low velocity and all the germs on the clothing that entered the wound . Also you saY nobodody is banning hunting rifles. But now you oppose rifles period. So you want people to hunt with handguns? What do you actually want?

'

We can start with raising the purchasing age to 21 for all guns, not just handguns. Don't give me the "what about military age" crap answer, either, I have family who are military at under age 21, but even military base carry is restricted and they get screened just to enter the military, then extensive training. Not the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses

I care about rifle wounds because they are most difficult to survive, especially for kids. Working in healthcare, it's very clear people survive handgun wounds (unless to brain/heart of course) far easier than rifle wounds.

I care about guns in general because even if criminals turn to knives, at least I won't have to check my sleeping child anymore to ensure a bullet didn't penetrate their window (and yes, I've had to check my sleeping child due to gun shots in my alley and know of neighbors who found bullets that penetrated windows). At least fewer bystanders caught in targeted drive by shootings; you have to be up close and personal to get a knife wound in.

you realize musket wounds are even worse? If you survive the shot you died of infection due to the low velocity and all the germs on the clothing that entered the wound . Also you saY nobodody is banning hunting rifles. But now you oppose rifles period. So you want people to hunt with handguns? What do you actually want?

'

We can start with raising the purchasing age to 21 for all guns, not just handguns. Don't give me the "what about military age" crap answer, either, I have family who are military at under age 21, but even military base carry is restricted and they get screened just to enter the military, then extensive training. Not the same.

Also, limit bulk sales. Up to a quarter of guns used in crimes are purchased in bulk sales and bulk sales are a strong indication of criminal intent.

Red states honestly could tighten up a lot given up to half or sometimes more of guns used in urban crime are trafficked from red states where straw purchases are easy.

Reduction to 1 gun a month in Virginia dramatically reduced guns used in crime being traced back to Virginia. They get them elsewhere, of course, given there are still plenty of red states that pretend to be about "law and order" while letting straw purchases be easily conducted in their state.