Common Sense Gun Laws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Somehow I think we can find another way to dispatch a bunch of hogs than letting everyone in America have AR-15s.

But "they can travel in packs of up to 50-60 hogs"!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks: "Gun Control" is a dead term. It died at Sandy Hook. The new term is Massacre Reduction. Pass it on.

Yea, seems like a good way to refocus our efforts on the root cause of mental health crisis.

Great idea!!!

? "Mental health crisis" is a Republican talking point. See also: "Criminals."

The crisis is widespread retail access to assault weapons.

To that point, there's some sweet deals here if you're in the market:

https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/category.cfm/sportsman/ar-15-rifles

But, yes, the new term (replacing soggy old, failed "gun control") is Massacre Reduction.

“massacre reduction” is a democrat talking point. See also “common sense gun safety laws”


At least have the honesty to call it what you actually want: “gun bans and gun confiscation”


Just be honest about it. Let people decide on the real goal, rather than hiding it in deliberately non-specific euphemisms.

Idiot,

Massacre Reduction is not a Democratic talking point, but it should be. See

I’m noticing a prevailing trend here: gun grabbers and hoplophobes like you always seem to begin their retort with an insult.

Why is that? Why are you incapable of discussion without insulting others? What do you attribute that to? A lack of self control?

Here's another prevailing trend: Mass shooters killing people. Didja hear the latest? 19 children were slaughtered last week, most of them by having their face blown off.

Non-sequitur.

Can you please try to answer the question?

Why does anyone need an AR 15? Why do these bloody slaughters happen mostly in the USA again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again?

There's lots of reasons to own one, but you will likely dismiss them.

+1. I use one for terminating chipmunks and wild boar, both of which wreak havoc on our farmland. The latter also tastes awesome. The other big thing that they can be used for is as an insurance policy against a tyrannical government, i.e. as the founding fathers intended. If just 5% of a 300 million population country owns weaponry, it makes going door to door and sending people the the gulag very costly for a government that gets out of hand. It’s hard to imagine a situation where the US government is going door to door and sending people to the gulag, but who thought it would happen in Germany at the time.

I cannot disagree after 2020...We didn't have quarantine camps for Covid patients like Australia or China. Our government did contemplate all large employer mandates, but never all citizen mandates like some countries in Europe. Our SCOTUS thankfully threw away OSHA mandates. Most of the country didn't go with Covid insanity and mandatory shots. I know this is a wrong audience for this, but imagine living in NYC where your kids are banned from indoor public places, all organized child activities, and where toddlers are still mandated to wear masks when EVERYONE else isn't. I know even on this extremely pro-mandate forum many were hesitating to vaccinate their young kids at first or ever until enough long term data, etc. But if you lived in NYC with 5+ kids coercion would have been very hard to overcome, and ultimately you would not have felt like you had any decision power at all. You simply would not have had so much "luxury" to wait and see like some of you here did when it came to 5+ kids, especially Covid recovered kids.

So the reason the Govt didn't overreach as you state above (like china and europe according to you) was because you had an AR15?

DP

There are plenty of people who do believe that the high ownership rate of firearms acts as an effective deterrent to government overreach. We haven't seen any sort of pushback since the 40's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Somehow I think we can find another way to dispatch a bunch of hogs than letting everyone in America have AR-15s.

Then remove the due process clause on the 14th amendment so that some states can ban them entirely and others can have them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Somehow I think we can find another way to dispatch a bunch of hogs than letting everyone in America have AR-15s.

Then remove the due process clause on the 14th amendment so that some states can ban them entirely and others can have them.

Isn't it already the case in some cities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks: "Gun Control" is a dead term. It died at Sandy Hook. The new term is Massacre Reduction. Pass it on.

Yea, seems like a good way to refocus our efforts on the root cause of mental health crisis.

Great idea!!!

? "Mental health crisis" is a Republican talking point. See also: "Criminals."

The crisis is widespread retail access to assault weapons.

To that point, there's some sweet deals here if you're in the market:

https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/category.cfm/sportsman/ar-15-rifles

But, yes, the new term (replacing soggy old, failed "gun control") is Massacre Reduction.

“massacre reduction” is a democrat talking point. See also “common sense gun safety laws”


At least have the honesty to call it what you actually want: “gun bans and gun confiscation”


Just be honest about it. Let people decide on the real goal, rather than hiding it in deliberately non-specific euphemisms.

Idiot,

Massacre Reduction is not a Democratic talking point, but it should be. See

I’m noticing a prevailing trend here: gun grabbers and hoplophobes like you always seem to begin their retort with an insult.

Why is that? Why are you incapable of discussion without insulting others? What do you attribute that to? A lack of self control?

Here's another prevailing trend: Mass shooters killing people. Didja hear the latest? 19 children were slaughtered last week, most of them by having their face blown off.

Non-sequitur.

Can you please try to answer the question?

Why does anyone need an AR 15? Why do these bloody slaughters happen mostly in the USA again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again?

There's lots of reasons to own one, but you will likely dismiss them.

+1. I use one for terminating chipmunks and wild boar, both of which wreak havoc on our farmland. The latter also tastes awesome. The other big thing that they can be used for is as an insurance policy against a tyrannical government, i.e. as the founding fathers intended. If just 5% of a 300 million population country owns weaponry, it makes going door to door and sending people the the gulag very costly for a government that gets out of hand. It’s hard to imagine a situation where the US government is going door to door and sending people to the gulag, but who thought it would happen in Germany at the time.

This is pure fiction. The founding fathers never intended gun ownership to be an insurance policy against tyrannical government. Read some history. 2A was meant to allow a well regulated militia to be raised in the absence of a standing army. Within 6 months of ratification of 2A, the founding fathers passed the Militia Act, which defined exactly what a militia is, who is eligible, what their responsibilities are, and who they answer to. Hint: it's the government, whether tyrannical or not. And your little theory was put to the test just a few months after that, when an armed band of ridgerunners decided the government was tyrannical for levying a whiskey tax. The founding fathers authorized George Washington to crush their rebellion, which he then did.

As for the wild boar, a .308 or 30-30 is more suitable than the ubiquitous .223 AR. I don't know many farmers who use AR's and in fact most of the country folk I know would think you're some kind of wackjob for showing up to go hunting with an AR. I'm starting to think you're one of those suburban Orvis country-wanna-be's like Ted Cruz.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks: "Gun Control" is a dead term. It died at Sandy Hook. The new term is Massacre Reduction. Pass it on.

Yea, seems like a good way to refocus our efforts on the root cause of mental health crisis.

Great idea!!!

? "Mental health crisis" is a Republican talking point. See also: "Criminals."

The crisis is widespread retail access to assault weapons.

To that point, there's some sweet deals here if you're in the market:

https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/category.cfm/sportsman/ar-15-rifles

But, yes, the new term (replacing soggy old, failed "gun control") is Massacre Reduction.

“massacre reduction” is a democrat talking point. See also “common sense gun safety laws”


At least have the honesty to call it what you actually want: “gun bans and gun confiscation”


Just be honest about it. Let people decide on the real goal, rather than hiding it in deliberately non-specific euphemisms.

Idiot,

Massacre Reduction is not a Democratic talking point, but it should be. See

I’m noticing a prevailing trend here: gun grabbers and hoplophobes like you always seem to begin their retort with an insult.

Why is that? Why are you incapable of discussion without insulting others? What do you attribute that to? A lack of self control?

Here's another prevailing trend: Mass shooters killing people. Didja hear the latest? 19 children were slaughtered last week, most of them by having their face blown off.

Non-sequitur.

Can you please try to answer the question?

Why does anyone need an AR 15? Why do these bloody slaughters happen mostly in the USA again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again?

There's lots of reasons to own one, but you will likely dismiss them.

+1. I use one for terminating chipmunks and wild boar, both of which wreak havoc on our farmland. The latter also tastes awesome. The other big thing that they can be used for is as an insurance policy against a tyrannical government, i.e. as the founding fathers intended. If just 5% of a 300 million population country owns weaponry, it makes going door to door and sending people the the gulag very costly for a government that gets out of hand. It’s hard to imagine a situation where the US government is going door to door and sending people to the gulag, but who thought it would happen in Germany at the time.

Awwwwww .. you poor thing. You might have to choose a different gun for your hunting and protecting and the earth will spin on.

DP

You need an appropriate tool for hunting. You can use a screwdriver to hammer nails into a piece of wood, but its not going to do it well.

There are far more "deadly" rifles for hunting, as the AR15 shoots a relatively small bullet at a high velocity. You could pick a much heavier/more destructive round, but its going to destroy more of the meat you want to eat (and you don't want to "explode" the animal) and with a louder sound is more likely to scare off game should you miss. Likewise the larger recoil makes a follow up shot more difficult, because if you wound the animal, you want to end its suffering as soon as possible.

You may be unaware that a traditional hunting rifle is no different than a "sniper rifle". Indeed several currently military sniper rifles are based off civilian hunting rifles.

Bullsh**. Nobody hunts (anything other than humans) with an AR-15. You'd look like a complete dickh**d out in the woods with one of those.

Disagree, its not uncommon to see them for feral hogs. .223 is a good enough round for them. Plus you typically find them in large groups, so if you're trying to control the population, being able to shoot 30 rounds to take several hogs in quick succession is quite useful. They can travel in packs of up to 50-60 hogs.

If you live in the southern portion of the country, they can be a large problem.

Okay, so then why can't we have AR-15s available for people who hunt hogs and similar without making them freely available to the general population? Take a gun safety course, get a hunting license, register your gun, etc and you can shoot all the hogs you want. A teenager in Greenwich, CT, on the other hand, has no need for an AR-15.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New shooting in Tulsa. Just another day in America.

Were there any propped-open doors?

#LockGate

[Anonymous]

I love the trolls on this Forum starting dumb threads like this. Jeff, clean this stuff up. You’re better than this.

[Anonymous]

https://www.foxnews.com/media/uvalde-school-shooting-hero-border-patrol-agent-speaks-complete-chaos-rushing-save-students

Thank god for this brave CBP agent.

If the. Idea administration got its way he wouldn’t have had a job, let alone be able to get a gun from the barber he was visiting and go in and do what the police wouldn’t.

Remember, you’re responsible for protecting yourself. And your community. This shows the government won’t help. One only has to look at SF and see Walgreens and other shops closing down as the government won’t catch people walking out with bags of items they steal in broad daylight. Nor will they help when looters and rioters are running amok in your community.

The left and the democrat party’s attempts to limit your right to have firearms is a means to an end, their total and utter ability to control you and have you not be able to defend yourself when they unleash their thugs and pianos agitators on you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/media/uvalde-school-shooting-hero-border-patrol-agent-speaks-complete-chaos-rushing-save-students

Thank god for this brave CBP agent.

If the. Idea administration got its way he wouldn’t have had a job, let alone be able to get a gun from the barber he was visiting and go in and do what the police wouldn’t.

Remember, you’re responsible for protecting yourself. And your community. This shows the government won’t help. One only has to look at SF and see Walgreens and other shops closing down as the government won’t catch people walking out with bags of items they steal in broad daylight. Nor will they help when looters and rioters are running amok in your community.

The left and the democrat party’s attempts to limit your right to have firearms is a means to an end, their total and utter ability to control you and have you not be able to defend yourself when they unleash their thugs and pianos agitators on you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/media/uvalde-school-shooting-hero-border-patrol-agent-speaks-complete-chaos-rushing-save-students

Thank god for this brave CBP agent.

If the. Idea administration got its way he wouldn’t have had a job, let alone be able to get a gun from the barber he was visiting and go in and do what the police wouldn’t.

Remember, you’re responsible for protecting yourself. And your community. This shows the government won’t help. One only has to look at SF and see Walgreens and other shops closing down as the government won’t catch people walking out with bags of items they steal in broad daylight. Nor will they help when looters and rioters are running amok in your community.

The left and the democrat party’s attempts to limit your right to have firearms is a means to an end, their total and utter ability to control you and have you not be able to defend yourself when they unleash their thugs and pianos agitators on you

Lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks: "Gun Control" is a dead term. It died at Sandy Hook. The new term is Massacre Reduction. Pass it on.

Yea, seems like a good way to refocus our efforts on the root cause of mental health crisis.

Great idea!!!

? "Mental health crisis" is a Republican talking point. See also: "Criminals."

The crisis is widespread retail access to assault weapons.

To that point, there's some sweet deals here if you're in the market:

https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/category.cfm/sportsman/ar-15-rifles

But, yes, the new term (replacing soggy old, failed "gun control") is Massacre Reduction.

“massacre reduction” is a democrat talking point. See also “common sense gun safety laws”


At least have the honesty to call it what you actually want: “gun bans and gun confiscation”


Just be honest about it. Let people decide on the real goal, rather than hiding it in deliberately non-specific euphemisms.

Idiot,

Massacre Reduction is not a Democratic talking point, but it should be. See

I’m noticing a prevailing trend here: gun grabbers and hoplophobes like you always seem to begin their retort with an insult.

Why is that? Why are you incapable of discussion without insulting others? What do you attribute that to? A lack of self control?

Here's another prevailing trend: Mass shooters killing people. Didja hear the latest? 19 children were slaughtered last week, most of them by having their face blown off.

Non-sequitur.

Can you please try to answer the question?

Why does anyone need an AR 15? Why do these bloody slaughters happen mostly in the USA again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again?

There's lots of reasons to own one, but you will likely dismiss them.

+1. I use one for terminating chipmunks and wild boar, both of which wreak havoc on our farmland. The latter also tastes awesome. The other big thing that they can be used for is as an insurance policy against a tyrannical government, i.e. as the founding fathers intended. If just 5% of a 300 million population country owns weaponry, it makes going door to door and sending people the the gulag very costly for a government that gets out of hand. It’s hard to imagine a situation where the US government is going door to door and sending people to the gulag, but who thought it would happen in Germany at the time.

This is pure fiction. The founding fathers never intended gun ownership to be an insurance policy against tyrannical government. Read some history. 2A was meant to allow a well regulated militia to be raised in the absence of a standing army. Within 6 months of ratification of 2A, the founding fathers passed the Militia Act, which defined exactly what a militia is, who is eligible, what their responsibilities are, and who they answer to. Hint: it's the government, whether tyrannical or not. And your little theory was put to the test just a few months after that, when an armed band of ridgerunners decided the government was tyrannical for levying a whiskey tax. The founding fathers authorized George Washington to crush their rebellion, which he then did.

As for the wild boar, a .308 or 30-30 is more suitable than the ubiquitous .223 AR. I don't know many farmers who use AR's and in fact most of the country folk I know would think you're some kind of wackjob for showing up to go hunting with an AR. I'm starting to think you're one of those suburban Orvis country-wanna-be's like Ted Cruz.

*nods*

[Anonymous]

My grandparents had a farm and would hunt animals on their property. They had guns hanging on the wall in the dining room. They were easy to grab so he could go out and hunt when needed if he saw an animal in the yard. Do you know where he kept them after I was born?. In a locked, safe and a locked cabinet in their bedroom. I meant he had to do more work to get one out but it meant I never could and that was the price he was willing to pay to make sure I was safe.
He would let me hold and unloaded gun in the pickup while we drove around looking at crops and talked about gun safety but there is no way in hell he would be for the law free gun filled society we have today. He loved his guns and loved hunting, but he would do whatever he could to make sure that children were safe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks: "Gun Control" is a dead term. It died at Sandy Hook. The new term is Massacre Reduction. Pass it on.

Yea, seems like a good way to refocus our efforts on the root cause of mental health crisis.

Great idea!!!

? "Mental health crisis" is a Republican talking point. See also: "Criminals."

The crisis is widespread retail access to assault weapons.

To that point, there's some sweet deals here if you're in the market:

https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/category.cfm/sportsman/ar-15-rifles

But, yes, the new term (replacing soggy old, failed "gun control") is Massacre Reduction.

“massacre reduction” is a democrat talking point. See also “common sense gun safety laws”


At least have the honesty to call it what you actually want: “gun bans and gun confiscation”


Just be honest about it. Let people decide on the real goal, rather than hiding it in deliberately non-specific euphemisms.

Idiot,

Massacre Reduction is not a Democratic talking point, but it should be. See

I’m noticing a prevailing trend here: gun grabbers and hoplophobes like you always seem to begin their retort with an insult.

Why is that? Why are you incapable of discussion without insulting others? What do you attribute that to? A lack of self control?

Here's another prevailing trend: Mass shooters killing people. Didja hear the latest? 19 children were slaughtered last week, most of them by having their face blown off.

Non-sequitur.

Can you please try to answer the question?

Why does anyone need an AR 15? Why do these bloody slaughters happen mostly in the USA again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again?

There's lots of reasons to own one, but you will likely dismiss them.

+1. I use one for terminating chipmunks and wild boar, both of which wreak havoc on our farmland. The latter also tastes awesome. The other big thing that they can be used for is as an insurance policy against a tyrannical government, i.e. as the founding fathers intended. If just 5% of a 300 million population country owns weaponry, it makes going door to door and sending people the the gulag very costly for a government that gets out of hand. It’s hard to imagine a situation where the US government is going door to door and sending people to the gulag, but who thought it would happen in Germany at the time.

The founding fathers DID NOT intend for you to use an AR 15 to do anything, because at the time of the constitution, AR 15s DID NOT EXIST!. There is absolutely NO RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION TO OWNING AN AR 15- those items did not even exist at the time. So yes, you may be entitled to a musket, which existed at the time, but certainly not a semi automatic weapon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks: "Gun Control" is a dead term. It died at Sandy Hook. The new term is Massacre Reduction. Pass it on.

Yea, seems like a good way to refocus our efforts on the root cause of mental health crisis.

Great idea!!!

? "Mental health crisis" is a Republican talking point. See also: "Criminals."

The crisis is widespread retail access to assault weapons.

To that point, there's some sweet deals here if you're in the market:

https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/category.cfm/sportsman/ar-15-rifles

But, yes, the new term (replacing soggy old, failed "gun control") is Massacre Reduction.

“massacre reduction” is a democrat talking point. See also “common sense gun safety laws”


At least have the honesty to call it what you actually want: “gun bans and gun confiscation”


Just be honest about it. Let people decide on the real goal, rather than hiding it in deliberately non-specific euphemisms.

Idiot,

Massacre Reduction is not a Democratic talking point, but it should be. See

I’m noticing a prevailing trend here: gun grabbers and hoplophobes like you always seem to begin their retort with an insult.

Why is that? Why are you incapable of discussion without insulting others? What do you attribute that to? A lack of self control?

Here's another prevailing trend: Mass shooters killing people. Didja hear the latest? 19 children were slaughtered last week, most of them by having their face blown off.

Non-sequitur.

Can you please try to answer the question?

Why does anyone need an AR 15? Why do these bloody slaughters happen mostly in the USA again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again?

There's lots of reasons to own one, but you will likely dismiss them.

+1. I use one for terminating chipmunks and wild boar, both of which wreak havoc on our farmland. The latter also tastes awesome. The other big thing that they can be used for is as an insurance policy against a tyrannical government, i.e. as the founding fathers intended. If just 5% of a 300 million population country owns weaponry, it makes going door to door and sending people the the gulag very costly for a government that gets out of hand. It’s hard to imagine a situation where the US government is going door to door and sending people to the gulag, but who thought it would happen in Germany at the time.

The founding fathers DID NOT intend for you to use an AR 15 to do anything, because at the time of the constitution, AR 15s DID NOT EXIST!. There is absolutely NO RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION TO OWNING AN AR 15- those items did not even exist at the time. So yes, you may be entitled to a musket, which existed at the time, but certainly not a semi automatic weapon.

Repeating firearms existed more than 50 years before the constitution. I'm pretty certain that the founders understood technological innovation, "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." Article I Section 8 | Clause 8