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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that you think banning AR-15s would make any difference.

What's funny about this? I find none of this funny. Especially a few days after nineteen 4th graders got murdered with one.

Because there are far more powerful rifles and shotguns that can easily be purchased. The shooter would have used something else.

The more powerful rifles and shotguns are difficult to fire accurately AND rapidly. Much greater recoil means that the shooter has difficulty landing the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc shots on moving targets. In the case of a school shooting, this may provide essential seconds to move out of the line of fire, flee, or physically restrain the assailant.

AR-15s are so deadly because they allow you to mow down everything in front of you in a matter of seconds. They also have larger magazines that more powerful hunting rifles and shotguns require frequent reloads.

In a massacre, the gunman doesn't want raw power; he wants the sweet spot of speed AND accuracy AND power. This is why the AR-15 type is so deadly and absolutely should be banned from civilian ownership.

Hilarious. A shotgun would have been a much better choice due to short range nature of the school shooting. It doesn't require precision aiming for maximum effect. The AR-15 is almost the worst choice for close engagement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree.

You live in an extreme bubble and do not realize it.

What is honestly the reason for owning this style of weapon? People always say we don’t get it, and when we agree, we don’t so explain it, no one ever does. How do we get out of this bubble and hear all sides when one side won’t explain their perspective.

+1. I am genuinely curious about why a regular person (not military or LEO) would own these types of weapons. What is the practical purpose and use of it in a non-military/LE setting? Is it more fun to shoot at a range? It doesn’t seem like a superior option for home or personal protection. This has been asked a few times on this thread — can someone please answer???

OK, I'll bite. DH has one. He collects guns and got it because he thought they might be banned. It's never been shot or even loaded. It's collecting dust in a gun safe. I don't like that he has one (or any guns). And he doesn't even go to the range (has been 3 times in 10+ years). I find it very strange, but at this point I prefer it sitting in our always locked (key and passcode needed) safe unloaded than sold and potentially end up in dangerous hands.

This is actually a very dangerous situation:

- he has never used this weapon
- he does not train at the range, so his marksmanship is likely very poor
- it is “collecting dust”, therefore not being maintained properly (is the same true for your other weapons?)

Remember that statistically, firearms are more likely to be used AGAINST household inhabitants than against an intruder. If he isn’t training, and he doesn’t maintain his weapons, chances are if he tries to use them in a real life-or-death situation, he or your family will get hurt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s funny. People here don’t even know what a AR-15 is and can’t define it. Yet want to try to tell others what they’re crazy for owning.

And I don’t own a gun fyi.

So please, educate us instead of insulting. What is it and why would someone want one?

It's not up to you to decide what others should or should not one. All you are showing is fake outrage. What do you plan to do about it? Nothing, right? Other than coming here and telling people how righteous you are.

NP-I don't know about anyone else on this thread, but I've already called my state senator and rep and will be attending a lobby day at my statehouse next week. We have 5 bills, which if our state senate leadership will allow a floor vote will pass and our gov has said he will sign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that you think banning AR-15s would make any difference.

What's funny about this? I find none of this funny. Especially a few days after nineteen 4th graders got murdered with one.

Because there are far more powerful rifles and shotguns that can easily be purchased. The shooter would have used something else.

The more powerful rifles and shotguns are difficult to fire accurately AND rapidly. Much greater recoil means that the shooter has difficulty landing the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc shots on moving targets. In the case of a school shooting, this may provide essential seconds to move out of the line of fire, flee, or physically restrain the assailant.

AR-15s are so deadly because they allow you to mow down everything in front of you in a matter of seconds. They also have larger magazines that more powerful hunting rifles and shotguns require frequent reloads.

In a massacre, the gunman doesn't want raw power; he wants the sweet spot of speed AND accuracy AND power. This is why the AR-15 type is so deadly and absolutely should be banned from civilian ownership.

Hilarious. A shotgun would have been a much better choice due to short range nature of the school shooting. It doesn't require precision aiming for maximum effect. The AR-15 is almost the worst choice for close engagement.

Any of you PPs who have used the words "funny" or "hilarious" with regard to this discussion are demented. None of this is funny. Not one bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree.

You live in an extreme bubble and do not realize it.

What is honestly the reason for owning this style of weapon? People always say we don’t get it, and when we agree, we don’t so explain it, no one ever does. How do we get out of this bubble and hear all sides when one side won’t explain their perspective.

+1. I am genuinely curious about why a regular person (not military or LEO) would own these types of weapons. What is the practical purpose and use of it in a non-military/LE setting? Is it more fun to shoot at a range? It doesn’t seem like a superior option for home or personal protection. This has been asked a few times on this thread — can someone please answer???

OK, I'll bite. DH has one. He collects guns and got it because he thought they might be banned. It's never been shot or even loaded. It's collecting dust in a gun safe. I don't like that he has one (or any guns). And he doesn't even go to the range (has been 3 times in 10+ years). I find it very strange, but at this point I prefer it sitting in our always locked (key and passcode needed) safe unloaded than sold and potentially end up in dangerous hands.

This is actually a very dangerous situation:

- he has never used this weapon
- he does not train at the range, so his marksmanship is likely very poor
- it is “collecting dust”, therefore not being maintained properly (is the same true for your other weapons?)

Remember that statistically, firearms are more likely to be used AGAINST household inhabitants than against an intruder. If he isn’t training, and he doesn’t maintain his weapons, chances are if he tries to use them in a real life-or-death situation, he or your family will get hurt.

I see your point but it is never going to be used. The guns aren't for home protection. The way we have them stored would preclude that. All guns are stored unloaded and bullets are stored in a separate safe (each safe requires both a key and a passcode).

[Anonymous]

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.

“Not good for hunting.” Depends on the game. The 5.56x45 cartridge is considered a “varmint” round, typically used to get rid of prairie dogs and the like. It is ordinarily viewed as inadequate for deer or larger animals. It does OK against feral swine.

“Disintegrate the trophy or meat.” You’ve been watching too many movies. They’re bullets, not hand grenades.

“the firearm is 4x more powerful than a 9mm handgun and will go through multiple walls and potentially hit your family.”. I don’t know how you’re measuring “power,” but a 5.56 round actually is less likely than a 9mm to penetrate drywall and framing; if you’re “potentially hitting your family” you’re violating Safety Rule no. 4: “be sure of your target and what’s beyond it.”

“Assault rifle.” An AR15 lacks fully automatic capability. It cannot, by any definition, be an “assault weapon.” It is no different in operation than numerous other rifles, many if not most of them predating WWII. It just “looks scary.”

Target shooting is a sport. It is difficult. It requires study, training, practice and self-discipline. The AR15 is the gun of choice for “high power” and “service rifle” competition, where people challenge themselves to place those tiny little bullets precisely at distances up to 600 yards, without (until recently) any optical aids — only “iron sights.”

Self defense is a natural right. The right to self defense Carrie’s with it the right to the efficacious means of self defense.

Instead of blaming inanimate objects you know nothing about, and disparaging people with interests (and self discipline) you do not share, why don’t you ask yourself (1) why are these shootings occurring now, when guns are heavily regulated, instead of in the past, when a person could buy a gun cash and carry at the local K-Mart with no regulation or records; (2) why, after too many such events, schools are still sitting ducks for demented, evil, sick people — other places are secure; why aren’t schools; (3) why are there so many demented, evil, sick people who think it’s appropriate or desirable to do such things — what is making them that way; (4) why are the perpetrators of these things not being identified in advance — in the vast majority of cases their crimes surprise no one who knew them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s funny. People here don’t even know what a AR-15 is and can’t define it. Yet want to try to tell others what they’re crazy for owning.

And I don’t own a gun fyi.

So please, educate us instead of insulting. What is it and why would someone want one?

It's not up to you to decide what others should or should not one. All you are showing is fake outrage. What do you plan to do about it? Nothing, right? Other than coming here and telling people how righteous you are.

Why would someone's outrage about little kids getting gunned down at school be fake? Righteous? Yes, trying to reduce needless murder of kids is righteous. Let me guess, you think it's "virtue signaling". Or perhaps some people actually want a safe and peaceful society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree.

You live in an extreme bubble and do not realize it.

What is honestly the reason for owning this style of weapon? People always say we don’t get it, and when we agree, we don’t so explain it, no one ever does. How do we get out of this bubble and hear all sides when one side won’t explain their perspective.

+1. I am genuinely curious about why a regular person (not military or LEO) would own these types of weapons. What is the practical purpose and use of it in a non-military/LE setting? Is it more fun to shoot at a range? It doesn’t seem like a superior option for home or personal protection. This has been asked a few times on this thread — can someone please answer???

OK, I'll bite. DH has one. He collects guns and got it because he thought they might be banned. It's never been shot or even loaded. It's collecting dust in a gun safe. I don't like that he has one (or any guns). And he doesn't even go to the range (has been 3 times in 10+ years). I find it very strange, but at this point I prefer it sitting in our always locked (key and passcode needed) safe unloaded than sold and potentially end up in dangerous hands.

This is actually a very dangerous situation:

- he has never used this weapon
- he does not train at the range, so his marksmanship is likely very poor
- it is “collecting dust”, therefore not being maintained properly (is the same true for your other weapons?)

Remember that statistically, firearms are more likely to be used AGAINST household inhabitants than against an intruder. If he isn’t training, and he doesn’t maintain his weapons, chances are if he tries to use them in a real life-or-death situation, he or your family will get hurt.

I see your point but it is never going to be used. The guns aren't for home protection. The way we have them stored would preclude that. All guns are stored unloaded and bullets are stored in a separate safe (each safe requires both a key and a passcode).

That just proves the PP’s point. There is no practical reason to have these weapons. “Collective dust and never going to be used” is not a good reason to own them nor for them to be legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My ex-military DH owns a crappy handgun (I posted about in a previous thread) but would never own an AR. He comes from a military/cop family.

But also note than an AR-15 isn't exactly an assault rifle, despite its name. The "AR" part doesn't stand for "assault rifle." I'm not saying that any of the other points aren't valid, just the assault rifle point isn't. It is a convenient rifle for hunting for many reasons. My DH is not a hunter, though.

I know some big boy LARP's will come in here and say "But I use it for hoggin'!," however the truth is that it is designed for hunting a group of humans. And that's it.

There are better and more noble rifles for deer hunting.

I'm the PP and would say that a bolt-action rifle would be better for hunting but hunters do use the AR-15 for various reasons. There are ways to make them better for hunting big game.

I guess a question could be - would a bolt-action rifle do less damage than the AR did in these terrible scenarios?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s funny. People here don’t even know what a AR-15 is and can’t define it. Yet want to try to tell others what they’re crazy for owning.

And I don’t own a gun fyi.

So please, educate us instead of insulting. What is it and why would someone want one?

It's not up to you to decide what others should or should not one. All you are showing is fake outrage. What do you plan to do about it? Nothing, right? Other than coming here and telling people how righteous you are.

DP and, first, you avoid giving any kind of answer as to why someone should want or own one. Gee, is that because you don't have one? Yes.

Second, the outrage is totally real and completely warranted.

Third, as a society we make lots of decisions about what people should or should not get to have. Our society needs to get its head out of its butt and ban ownership of guns such as these. There is no rational (emphasis on rational) reason for people to own them.

[Anonymous]

If you own any assault rifle you have a small penis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s funny. People here don’t even know what a AR-15 is and can’t define it. Yet want to try to tell others what they’re crazy for owning.

And I don’t own a gun fyi.

So please, educate us instead of insulting. What is it and why would someone want one?

It's not up to you to decide what others should or should not one. All you are showing is fake outrage. What do you plan to do about it? Nothing, right? Other than coming here and telling people how righteous you are.

I think you are mistaken that people will do nothing. But perhaps you are hoping people will forget. Everyone has gotten so used to high schoolers getting shot. But elem. kids are something different. It gets to people. But it may take a few more times of this happening. The ball is rolling.

I don't even know what that means. Ball is rolling? GOP is firmly against taking any actions. This news will die soon enough just like Sandy Hook. Yes, it makes me sick but I am not going to act like anything will change. We are totally f'ed. Don't lecture me. Tell me what specific actions you think we can take as an individual citizen living in a dark blue county/state.

I don't know where you are but getting involved to chip away at gun ownership bit by bit is the only way. This is precisely what the NRA is afraid of. That's why Republicans won't support stopping the sale of even the most dangerous items like the bump stock. Maybe getting the age raised to 21 to purchase these items. Which of your local politicians have been bought out by the NRA?
You say you are in a blue area. Are you familiar with the gun laws specific to your area? GOP want to send federal law back to the states. What can you do to get your state to pass more reasonable gun laws than the free-for-all that things currently are at. This is not an easy road. But what is the alternative?

[Anonymous]

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.

“Not good for hunting.” Depends on the game. The 5.56x45 cartridge is considered a “varmint” round, typically used to get rid of prairie dogs and the like. It is ordinarily viewed as inadequate for deer or larger animals. It does OK against feral swine.

“Disintegrate the trophy or meat.” You’ve been watching too many movies. They’re bullets, not hand grenades.

“the firearm is 4x more powerful than a 9mm handgun and will go through multiple walls and potentially hit your family.”. I don’t know how you’re measuring “power,” but a 5.56 round actually is less likely than a 9mm to penetrate drywall and framing; if you’re “potentially hitting your family” you’re violating Safety Rule no. 4: “be sure of your target and what’s beyond it.”

“Assault rifle.” An AR15 lacks fully automatic capability. It cannot, by any definition, be an “assault weapon.” It is no different in operation than numerous other rifles, many if not most of them predating WWII. It just “looks scary.”

Target shooting is a sport. It is difficult. It requires study, training, practice and self-discipline. The AR15 is the gun of choice for “high power” and “service rifle” competition, where people challenge themselves to place those tiny little bullets precisely at distances up to 600 yards, without (until recently) any optical aids — only “iron sights.”

Self defense is a natural right. The right to self defense Carrie’s with it the right to the efficacious means of self defense.

Instead of blaming inanimate objects you know nothing about, and disparaging people with interests (and self discipline) you do not share, why don’t you ask yourself (1) why are these shootings occurring now, when guns are heavily regulated, instead of in the past, when a person could buy a gun cash and carry at the local K-Mart with no regulation or records; (2) why, after too many such events, schools are still sitting ducks for demented, evil, sick people — other places are secure; why aren’t schools; (3) why are there so many demented, evil, sick people who think it’s appropriate or desirable to do such things — what is making them that way; (4) why are the perpetrators of these things not being identified in advance — in the vast majority of cases their crimes surprise no one who knew them.

^^Supports the killing of children.

[Anonymous]

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.

“Not good for hunting.” Depends on the game. The 5.56x45 cartridge is considered a “varmint” round, typically used to get rid of prairie dogs and the like. It is ordinarily viewed as inadequate for deer or larger animals. It does OK against feral swine.

“Disintegrate the trophy or meat.” You’ve been watching too many movies. They’re bullets, not hand grenades.

“the firearm is 4x more powerful than a 9mm handgun and will go through multiple walls and potentially hit your family.”. I don’t know how you’re measuring “power,” but a 5.56 round actually is less likely than a 9mm to penetrate drywall and framing; if you’re “potentially hitting your family” you’re violating Safety Rule no. 4: “be sure of your target and what’s beyond it.”

“Assault rifle.” An AR15 lacks fully automatic capability. It cannot, by any definition, be an “assault weapon.” It is no different in operation than numerous other rifles, many if not most of them predating WWII. It just “looks scary.”

Target shooting is a sport. It is difficult. It requires study, training, practice and self-discipline. The AR15 is the gun of choice for “high power” and “service rifle” competition, where people challenge themselves to place those tiny little bullets precisely at distances up to 600 yards, without (until recently) any optical aids — only “iron sights.”

Self defense is a natural right. The right to self defense Carrie’s with it the right to the efficacious means of self defense.

Instead of blaming inanimate objects you know nothing about, and disparaging people with interests (and self discipline) you do not share, why don’t you ask yourself (1) why are these shootings occurring now, when guns are heavily regulated, instead of in the past, when a person could buy a gun cash and carry at the local K-Mart with no regulation or records; (2) why, after too many such events, schools are still sitting ducks for demented, evil, sick people — other places are secure; why aren’t schools; (3) why are there so many demented, evil, sick people who think it’s appropriate or desirable to do such things — what is making them that way; (4) why are the perpetrators of these things not being identified in advance — in the vast majority of cases their crimes surprise no one who knew them.

What a bunch of uninformed drivel. The real gun experts should kick you out of their club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree.

You live in an extreme bubble and do not realize it.

What is honestly the reason for owning this style of weapon? People always say we don’t get it, and when we agree, we don’t so explain it, no one ever does. How do we get out of this bubble and hear all sides when one side won’t explain their perspective.

+1. I am genuinely curious about why a regular person (not military or LEO) would own these types of weapons. What is the practical purpose and use of it in a non-military/LE setting? Is it more fun to shoot at a range? It doesn’t seem like a superior option for home or personal protection. This has been asked a few times on this thread — can someone please answer???

OK, I'll bite. DH has one. He collects guns and got it because he thought they might be banned. It's never been shot or even loaded. It's collecting dust in a gun safe. I don't like that he has one (or any guns). And he doesn't even go to the range (has been 3 times in 10+ years). I find it very strange, but at this point I prefer it sitting in our always locked (key and passcode needed) safe unloaded than sold and potentially end up in dangerous hands.

This is actually a very dangerous situation:

- he has never used this weapon
- he does not train at the range, so his marksmanship is likely very poor
- it is “collecting dust”, therefore not being maintained properly (is the same true for your other weapons?)

Remember that statistically, firearms are more likely to be used AGAINST household inhabitants than against an intruder. If he isn’t training, and he doesn’t maintain his weapons, chances are if he tries to use them in a real life-or-death situation, he or your family will get hurt.

I see your point but it is never going to be used. The guns aren't for home protection. The way we have them stored would preclude that. All guns are stored unloaded and bullets are stored in a separate safe (each safe requires both a key and a passcode).

That just proves the PP’s point. There is no practical reason to have these weapons. “Collective dust and never going to be used” is not a good reason to own them nor for them to be legal.

I completely agree there is no point in having them in my home and I would 100% support them being banned and would turn them in.