Do you own an AR15?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

Curious, because you and your husband were in the military, do you think it gives more substance to your opinion? If so, why? I don't see any other reason to start your reply with that info, yet, I can't see anyone being that ... dumb ... that they would think it made their opinion stronger.

Not PP but it means they’ve shot a lot of rounds. Being in the military you get to go to the range and shoot a shit ton of ammo for free (and it’s even your job to do it). Us civilians have to pay for the bullets we use, which makes shooting an AR15 very, very expensive and few people can do it regularly. Generally I respect the opinions of people more when they know something about the subject matter at hand.

Haha. Being in the military does not mean you know your way around guns. Yeah, you have to qualify but there is a range master holding your hand. That was my point. People are like...I was in the military so I know! You don't know crap...unless you were special forces or something. It reminds me of the sports forums....I played in college, so....so shut up! Just give your opinion and move along.

PS: and I know this because I was in the military...during a war...and I barely fired my weapon.

Well, most people in the military aren’t connected officers with hand-holding going on. But plenty of people in the military do actually use their weapons. And you just did what you are accusing PP of, using your military “experience” to say how much you know.

I’ve never been in the military at all, though, so obviously I know nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

Curious, because you and your husband were in the military, do you think it gives more substance to your opinion? If so, why? I don't see any other reason to start your reply with that info, yet, I can't see anyone being that ... dumb ... that they would think it made their opinion stronger.

Most of the people I work with are former military (civilian defense company) and almost all of them have guns including AR15’s for private use

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

A weapon like what?

A self-loading rifle that uses technology that’s been around since the late 1800’s and fires one bullet per trigger pull?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

Curious, because you and your husband were in the military, do you think it gives more substance to your opinion? If so, why? I don't see any other reason to start your reply with that info, yet, I can't see anyone being that ... dumb ... that they would think it made their opinion stronger.

Not PP but it means they’ve shot a lot of rounds. Being in the military you get to go to the range and shoot a shit ton of ammo for free (and it’s even your job to do it). Us civilians have to pay for the bullets we use, which makes shooting an AR15 very, very expensive and few people can do it regularly. Generally I respect the opinions of people more when they know something about the subject matter at hand.

Ammunition isn’t the same price as tic-tacs, but it’s hardly prohibitively expensive, particularly in an area like this, populated with well-compensated professionals. There are plenty of AR15 owners who regularly go out to the range for an hour, or two, or three, to practice and enjoy their hobby. There is an entire area of organized “service rifle” competition where hobbyists engage in marksmanship with amazing skill (iron sights at 600 yards, anyone), using discretionary income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. We're a hunting family and we do not approve of such a class of weapons. They should not be available to civilians or retired law enforcement.

A government of the people, by the people and for the people should never have special rights beyond the people.

And that shows you don't know how Life works. If the military cannot access weapons of war, you will soon not have a country. Peace exists because countries show they can defend themselves. But only as a last resort. Allowing the general public to use tanks and missiles also means you will soon not have a country.

An AR15 is no more a “weapon of war” than a .22 short “gallery rifle” at an old-time carnival. In fact, .22 rifles like the one grandad kept for “plinking” have more military use than an AR15.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. We own a handgun and a rifle.

We don't plan to mass murder anyone, and can aim a rifle while hunting, so no need to own an AR15.

The mechanical accuracy of the AR15 platform is widely accepted as extremely high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

Curious, because you and your husband were in the military, do you think it gives more substance to your opinion? If so, why? I don't see any other reason to start your reply with that info, yet, I can't see anyone being that ... dumb ... that they would think it made their opinion stronger.

Not PP but it means they’ve shot a lot of rounds. Being in the military you get to go to the range and shoot a shit ton of ammo for free (and it’s even your job to do it). Us civilians have to pay for the bullets we use, which makes shooting an AR15 very, very expensive and few people can do it regularly. Generally I respect the opinions of people more when they know something about the subject matter at hand.

I can assure you that this is sadly not the case. The vast majority of the military are in support roles about as much as police officers during annual quals.

80% of our military fall into the category of support.

The ones who do shoot a lot are in combat arms jobs such as the infantry. Even then the ones who really know any thing about guns or shooting are an even smaller percentage typically in special operations community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s the most popular rifle in the US with about 24 million being built. Wondering if any of my fellow educated urban elites happen to own one.

Naw it's much higher than that number. Perhaps 3 times higher. Over 900 million firearms in the USA now that have been mfg or imported since 1870s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

That's a logical fallacy, argument from authority. I believe you are former military.

Good catch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

Curious, because you and your husband were in the military, do you think it gives more substance to your opinion? If so, why? I don't see any other reason to start your reply with that info, yet, I can't see anyone being that ... dumb ... that they would think it made their opinion stronger.

Not PP but it means they’ve shot a lot of rounds. Being in the military you get to go to the range and shoot a shit ton of ammo for free (and it’s even your job to do it). Us civilians have to pay for the bullets we use, which makes shooting an AR15 very, very expensive and few people can do it regularly. Generally I respect the opinions of people more when they know something about the subject matter at hand.

Ah, I see you didn't serve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

Curious, because you and your husband were in the military, do you think it gives more substance to your opinion? If so, why? I don't see any other reason to start your reply with that info, yet, I can't see anyone being that ... dumb ... that they would think it made their opinion stronger.

Not PP but it means they’ve shot a lot of rounds. Being in the military you get to go to the range and shoot a shit ton of ammo for free (and it’s even your job to do it). Us civilians have to pay for the bullets we use, which makes shooting an AR15 very, very expensive and few people can do it regularly. Generally I respect the opinions of people more when they know something about the subject matter at hand.

Ammunition isn’t the same price as tic-tacs, but it’s hardly prohibitively expensive, particularly in an area like this, populated with well-compensated professionals. There are plenty of AR15 owners who regularly go out to the range for an hour, or two, or three, to practice and enjoy their hobby. There is an entire area of organized “service rifle” competition where hobbyists engage in marksmanship with amazing skill (iron sights at 600 yards, anyone), using discretionary income.

Well three hours of shooting an AR-15 with regularity would be prohibitively expensive! I don’t know about you, but I rarely go spend a couple thousand dollars on a Saturday afternoon activity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

Curious, because you and your husband were in the military, do you think it gives more substance to your opinion? If so, why? I don't see any other reason to start your reply with that info, yet, I can't see anyone being that ... dumb ... that they would think it made their opinion stronger.

Because people expect the military to be responsible with weapons. They do go through basic training, unlike most civilians with weapons.

And you are extremely rude for calling PP dumb.

Guess who trains the people who train the special forces? Civilians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

Curious, because you and your husband were in the military, do you think it gives more substance to your opinion? If so, why? I don't see any other reason to start your reply with that info, yet, I can't see anyone being that ... dumb ... that they would think it made their opinion stronger.

Not PP but it means they’ve shot a lot of rounds. Being in the military you get to go to the range and shoot a shit ton of ammo for free (and it’s even your job to do it). Us civilians have to pay for the bullets we use, which makes shooting an AR15 very, very expensive and few people can do it regularly. Generally I respect the opinions of people more when they know something about the subject matter at hand.

Ah, I see you didn't serve.

No, my dad did though, and I stand corrected. He shot a shit ton of ammo for free and loved it. We’re a farming family and I’ve been shooting since I was 5. He was very experienced as a marksman before his service and he was 82nd Airborne during Vietnam. He says they used to go out and pick up five gallon buckets of cartridges after their practices.

Sorry you modern military folks didn’t get to have much fun on the range, but I am sure other parts of his service were a lot less enjoyable than anything you all have done too.

It’s still expensive for us normal folks to shoot. We reload cartridges too, which nobody had to do in the military. Maybe DOGE should save some dough by putting all that support to good use this winter! Haha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. We own a handgun and a rifle.

We don't plan to mass murder anyone, and can aim a rifle while hunting, so no need to own an AR15.

The mechanical accuracy of the AR15 platform is widely accepted as extremely high.

And yet, I want to actually use skill while hunting instead of just going out there murdering animals.in the most efficient way. What's the skill in that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I are former military and not anti-gun. That said, we both strongly believe nobody outside the military (and a few specialized police units) should own a weapon like that. Ever.

Curious, because you and your husband were in the military, do you think it gives more substance to your opinion? If so, why? I don't see any other reason to start your reply with that info, yet, I can't see anyone being that ... dumb ... that they would think it made their opinion stronger.

Not PP but it means they’ve shot a lot of rounds. Being in the military you get to go to the range and shoot a shit ton of ammo for free (and it’s even your job to do it). Us civilians have to pay for the bullets we use, which makes shooting an AR15 very, very expensive and few people can do it regularly. Generally I respect the opinions of people more when they know something about the subject matter at hand.

Ah, I see you didn't serve.

No, my dad did though, and I stand corrected. He shot a shit ton of ammo for free and loved it. We’re a farming family and I’ve been shooting since I was 5. He was very experienced as a marksman before his service and he was 82nd Airborne during Vietnam. He says they used to go out and pick up five gallon buckets of cartridges after their practices.

Sorry you modern military folks didn’t get to have much fun on the range, but I am sure other parts of his service were a lot less enjoyable than anything you all have done too.

It’s still expensive for us normal folks to shoot. We reload cartridges too, which nobody had to do in the military. Maybe DOGE should save some dough by putting all that support to good use this winter! Haha

He must have been in during Vietnam era or right after. Military has never let people willy nilly expend ammo unless it was overseas and about to be demo'd instead of hauling it back to the states.