My hot take - if you own an AR-15 you have a few loose screws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's how the "psych eval" would go:


"you're applying for a permit to own a gun, Mrs. Smith?"

"yes, I am"

"and why do you want a gun, Mrs. Smith?"

"there was a home invasion across the street from me, and it took the police forever to show up. And by the time they did, my neighbors were murdered. I'd like to own a gun to protect my family with in case the same thing happened to us. At least we wouldn't be defenseless"

"that seems very paranoid and angry of you, Mrs. Smith, don't you agree? I'm afraid we're going to have to disapprove your application because of your pervasive mental illness".






That's pretty much how it would go.

In Maryland, that is exactly how they denied carry permits to most law-abiding citizens who applied.

[Anonymous]

You can be a gun owner AND support stricter gun legislation AND support mental health initiatives to combat social isolation or bullying. This country has been dragged so far to the right and the left, but most people want something in the middle. At this point, anything is a start. Raise the minimum age to buy a gun to at least 21. Hold parents liable for failure to secure their weapons.

When people say, "mental health," what does that look like? Oftentimes, there are few signs or they are subtle or missed. Mental illness is very common, but most mentally ill people do not end up killing others. I know a psychologist who works at high profile prison with mass murderers, and most mass murderers don't qualify as insane and A LOT of them have no diagnosable condition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's how the "psych eval" would go:


"you're applying for a permit to own a gun, Mrs. Smith?"

"yes, I am"

"and why do you want a gun, Mrs. Smith?"

"there was a home invasion across the street from me, and it took the police forever to show up. And by the time they did, my neighbors were murdered. I'd like to own a gun to protect my family with in case the same thing happened to us. At least we wouldn't be defenseless"

"that seems very paranoid and angry of you, Mrs. Smith, don't you agree? I'm afraid we're going to have to disapprove your application because of your pervasive mental illness".






That's pretty much how it would go.

In Maryland, that is exactly how they denied carry permits to most law-abiding citizens who applied.

But if you're carrying large amounts of cash, jewelry or DEA-Scheduled pharmaceuticals you get a permit as a matter of course. That's how I got mine - cash receipts from a bar.

Maryland doesn't care about your life - they just care that their tax-share of your business income is protected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete citation:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002961022002057

The sustained effect of a temporary measure: Urban firearm mortality following expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The comments here alone pretty much back up OP's hot take.

Apples and hammers comparison.

The 1990’s were a period of overall economic expansion and positivity. No pandemics, no unending wars, no 8 year hangover from the Great Recession, etc. people were overall much happier in the 90’s. I should know, I was there. I was a lot happier then. I’m mad AF a lot of the time now, and I’m not alone in that.

That is the kind of thing that would get picked up on the annual neuropsych testing many are advocating for (along with an assault weapon ban, annual training recertification, liability insurance, background screening on all sales and transfers).

I know and the mental gymnastics these Ammosexuals will go through just to somehow not blame the guns. Despite the fact that in every other first world country it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree or disagree? It's not a good gun for hunting - you'll disintegrate the trophy or meat. It's actually pretty terrible for home defense, as the the firearm is 4x more powerful than a 9mm handgun and will go through multiple walls and potentially hit your family.

So that really comes down to two reasons: (1) you intend to massacre a group of people as quickly and efficiently as possible or (2) because you LARP as an "operator" and somehow that gives you a sense of self-worth and confidence.

There's no reason to own this fire arm, unless you're a bit of a nutcase.

The. End.

The “standard” caliber of the AR15 (.233 or 5.56mm) is generally banned for hunting larger game (deer, etc) because the bullet is too small to kill game animals quickly and humanely. So much for your idiotic “DiSiNteRgraTe tHe MeAt!!!” nonsense….

The small, high speed 55grain bullet from the AR is terrible for penetrating walls because it has very little mass, and begins to shatter into fragments when it hits a hard surface. Slower moving and heavier pistol bullets like the 9mm you cite as “safer” actually penetrate residential walls far better than .223 rifle bullets…. Again, thanks for demonstrating you know nothing about the science here.


If the only reason for having an AR15 is to massacre large numbers of people quickly and efficiently - then why is there an AR15 in the trunk of literally every police car in this country? What large numbers of people are police planning on massacring quickly and efficiently?

You're sort of right and sort of wrong about the ballistics. Yes, the reason they ban .223 bullets for hunting deer is because they tend to wound larger animals rather than kill them instantly, but trying to kill a single deer and trying to kill 19 schoolchildren are different scenarios. No one is trying to shoot 19 deer in a field as quickly as possible; if they were they'd never pick a .30-06 because the recoil would make it really difficult to fire 19 times with enough accuracy to do that. There's a reason the military went with the 5.56 rather than 7.62, and part of it is that in an environment where you're shooting a lot of rounds at a lot of targets, it's a better choice; unfortunately that utility is there even in a classroom.

Also, all of the "actually, it's NOT a great weapon for a mass shooting" people have to explain why so many mass shooters pick it. None of you have done that.

And the thing about the AR 15 that the Ammosexuals love is that it can be configured to different calibers. And yet they trot out the ".223 is the standard" argument all the time to cloud the issue.

If it's so harmless then why do school shooters choose it then?

Btw I distinguish between responsible gun owners and Ammosexuals. I grew up around responsible gun owners. They didn't need to open carry a rifle into Wendy's. They didn't stick handguns into the waist of their jeans or yoga pants.

Prohibition failed with alcohol and the same thing is true for an assault weapons ban.

It will not work.

I would consider myself one of those who believes the 2nd amendment needs to be overhauled/amended (or something) because it’s outdated. But I agree an outright ban won’t work (a la prohibition of alcohol). That’s why we need to better control who gets to own one of these guns, and if it takes a neuropsych work up, a safety class and several references, then so be it. I don’t think this infringes on the 2nd amendment at all.

you really don't think a neuropsych workup infringes on someone's rights at all?

I was half kidding about the neuropsych workup, but I do think a requirement of mental fitness should be part of the process. I'll admit, I don't know how exactly one would do that.

How would this work? You aren't sane enough to own a gun, but good enough to be part of the general public? That's the real problem with this solution. When you start finding psychopaths, what is the government supposed to do with them? Let them roam the streets until they kill a few people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's how the "psych eval" would go:


"you're applying for a permit to own a gun, Mrs. Smith?"

"yes, I am"

"and why do you want a gun, Mrs. Smith?"

"there was a home invasion across the street from me, and it took the police forever to show up. And by the time they did, my neighbors were murdered. I'd like to own a gun to protect my family with in case the same thing happened to us. At least we wouldn't be defenseless"

"that seems very paranoid and angry of you, Mrs. Smith, don't you agree? I'm afraid we're going to have to disapprove your application because of your pervasive mental illness".






That's pretty much how it would go.

So what’s your solution?

Because the only solution I see pro-massacre nut jobs offering up is “mental health”. Which would literally be the same thing, except everyone would undergo psych evaluations and then….what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete citation:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002961022002057

The sustained effect of a temporary measure: Urban firearm mortality following expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The comments here alone pretty much back up OP's hot take.

Apples and hammers comparison.

The 1990’s were a period of overall economic expansion and positivity. No pandemics, no unending wars, no 8 year hangover from the Great Recession, etc. people were overall much happier in the 90’s. I should know, I was there. I was a lot happier then. I’m mad AF a lot of the time now, and I’m not alone in that.

That is the kind of thing that would get picked up on the annual neuropsych testing many are advocating for (along with an assault weapon ban, annual training recertification, liability insurance, background screening on all sales and transfers).

I know and the mental gymnastics these Ammosexuals will go through just to somehow not blame the guns. Despite the fact that in every other first world country it works.

What meds do you take?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's how the "psych eval" would go:


"you're applying for a permit to own a gun, Mrs. Smith?"

"yes, I am"

"and why do you want a gun, Mrs. Smith?"

"there was a home invasion across the street from me, and it took the police forever to show up. And by the time they did, my neighbors were murdered. I'd like to own a gun to protect my family with in case the same thing happened to us. At least we wouldn't be defenseless"

"that seems very paranoid and angry of you, Mrs. Smith, don't you agree? I'm afraid we're going to have to disapprove your application because of your pervasive mental illness".






That's pretty much how it would go.

So what’s your solution?

Because the only solution I see pro-massacre nut jobs offering up is “mental health”. Which would literally be the same thing, except everyone would undergo psych evaluations and then….what?

Yes, the problem is "mental health" and those doggone "criminals." It is not, repeat NOT, the widespread retail sale of assault weapons.

And speaking of sales, there are some very sweet deals going for AR-15s here:

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

Don't miss out! #RepublicansUnitedForMoreMassShootings

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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete citation:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002961022002057

The sustained effect of a temporary measure: Urban firearm mortality following expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The comments here alone pretty much back up OP's hot take.

Apples and hammers comparison.

The 1990’s were a period of overall economic expansion and positivity. No pandemics, no unending wars, no 8 year hangover from the Great Recession, etc. people were overall much happier in the 90’s. I should know, I was there. I was a lot happier then. I’m mad AF a lot of the time now, and I’m not alone in that.

That is the kind of thing that would get picked up on the annual neuropsych testing many are advocating for (along with an assault weapon ban, annual training recertification, liability insurance, background screening on all sales and transfers).

I know and the mental gymnastics these Ammosexuals will go through just to somehow not blame the guns. Despite the fact that in every other first world country it works.

What meds do you take?

Do you object to being called an ammosexual? Own it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete citation:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002961022002057

The sustained effect of a temporary measure: Urban firearm mortality following expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The comments here alone pretty much back up OP's hot take.

Apples and hammers comparison.

The 1990’s were a period of overall economic expansion and positivity. No pandemics, no unending wars, no 8 year hangover from the Great Recession, etc. people were overall much happier in the 90’s. I should know, I was there. I was a lot happier then. I’m mad AF a lot of the time now, and I’m not alone in that.

That is the kind of thing that would get picked up on the annual neuropsych testing many are advocating for (along with an assault weapon ban, annual training recertification, liability insurance, background screening on all sales and transfers).

I know and the mental gymnastics these Ammosexuals will go through just to somehow not blame the guns. Despite the fact that in every other first world country it works.

What meds do you take?

Do you object to being called an ammosexual? Own it.

How about what meds are you supposed to take? Own it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete citation:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002961022002057

The sustained effect of a temporary measure: Urban firearm mortality following expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The comments here alone pretty much back up OP's hot take.

Apples and hammers comparison.

The 1990’s were a period of overall economic expansion and positivity. No pandemics, no unending wars, no 8 year hangover from the Great Recession, etc. people were overall much happier in the 90’s. I should know, I was there. I was a lot happier then. I’m mad AF a lot of the time now, and I’m not alone in that.

That is the kind of thing that would get picked up on the annual neuropsych testing many are advocating for (along with an assault weapon ban, annual training recertification, liability insurance, background screening on all sales and transfers).

I know and the mental gymnastics these Ammosexuals will go through just to somehow not blame the guns. Despite the fact that in every other first world country it works.

What meds do you take?

Do you object to being called an ammosexual? Own it.

Yes, you are very clever coming up with the term "ammosexual" and dropping it left and right. I'll bet people are always telling you what a thoughtful and intelligent person you are [eye roll].

[Anonymous]

It's nice for gun nuts to come here and prove OP right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete citation:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002961022002057

The sustained effect of a temporary measure: Urban firearm mortality following expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The comments here alone pretty much back up OP's hot take.

Apples and hammers comparison.

The 1990’s were a period of overall economic expansion and positivity. No pandemics, no unending wars, no 8 year hangover from the Great Recession, etc. people were overall much happier in the 90’s. I should know, I was there. I was a lot happier then. I’m mad AF a lot of the time now, and I’m not alone in that.

That is the kind of thing that would get picked up on the annual neuropsych testing many are advocating for (along with an assault weapon ban, annual training recertification, liability insurance, background screening on all sales and transfers).

I know and the mental gymnastics these Ammosexuals will go through just to somehow not blame the guns. Despite the fact that in every other first world country it works.

What meds do you take?

Should the PP have several AR-15s with high-capacity magazines and 1000s of bullets?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete citation:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002961022002057

The sustained effect of a temporary measure: Urban firearm mortality following expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The comments here alone pretty much back up OP's hot take.

Apples and hammers comparison.

The 1990’s were a period of overall economic expansion and positivity. No pandemics, no unending wars, no 8 year hangover from the Great Recession, etc. people were overall much happier in the 90’s. I should know, I was there. I was a lot happier then. I’m mad AF a lot of the time now, and I’m not alone in that.

That is the kind of thing that would get picked up on the annual neuropsych testing many are advocating for (along with an assault weapon ban, annual training recertification, liability insurance, background screening on all sales and transfers).

I know and the mental gymnastics these Ammosexuals will go through just to somehow not blame the guns. Despite the fact that in every other first world country it works.

What meds do you take?

Do you object to being called an ammosexual? Own it.

Yes, you are very clever coming up with the term "ammosexual" and dropping it left and right. I'll bet people are always telling you what a thoughtful and intelligent person you are [eye roll].

In using “ammosexual” as an insult, PP is trying to equate ammunition with something she thinks is disgusting- like how she feels about homosexuals and other sexual deviants.

Isn’t that right, PP? You disgusting homophobe. Go away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete citation:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002961022002057

The sustained effect of a temporary measure: Urban firearm mortality following expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The comments here alone pretty much back up OP's hot take.

Apples and hammers comparison.

The 1990’s were a period of overall economic expansion and positivity. No pandemics, no unending wars, no 8 year hangover from the Great Recession, etc. people were overall much happier in the 90’s. I should know, I was there. I was a lot happier then. I’m mad AF a lot of the time now, and I’m not alone in that.

That is the kind of thing that would get picked up on the annual neuropsych testing many are advocating for (along with an assault weapon ban, annual training recertification, liability insurance, background screening on all sales and transfers).

I know and the mental gymnastics these Ammosexuals will go through just to somehow not blame the guns. Despite the fact that in every other first world country it works.

What meds do you take?

Do you object to being called an ammosexual? Own it.

Yes, you are very clever coming up with the term "ammosexual" and dropping it left and right. I'll bet people are always telling you what a thoughtful and intelligent person you are [eye roll].

In using “ammosexual” as an insult, PP is trying to equate ammunition with something she thinks is disgusting- like how she feels about homosexuals and other sexual deviants.

Isn’t that right, PP? You disgusting homophobe. Go away.

+1