Reply to Republican threatens Beto O'Rourke over gun confiscation pledge

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Republican threatens Beto O'Rourke over gun confiscation pledge"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I considered selling my weapons “back” to the government, but after a background check and thorough investigation into the buyer, I determined the buyer has a history of violence and is mentally unstable. Big risk to everyone around it.[/quote]

Not only that, but I keep wondering about something else I keep hearing: all these people on this thread keep saying that modern rifles [b]"are only made for killing huge numbers of people as quickly as possible"[/b]

If that's the case, why is there one in the trunk of literally every police car in America?  :?

What huge groups of people do our police officers need to be equipped to kill as quickly as possible?!?!  :shock:

Because I'm really puzzled about this one. And why are there different names for the same gun, depending on who's holding it?

Because the media would call an AR15 in *my* hands an "assault weapon".

But they call the exact SAME AR15 in a *police officer's* hands a "patrol carbine".

Same gun. Different verbiage, depending on who's holding it. One with a very negative connotation, the other with a very neutral one.

Anyone care to explain this?  [/quote]

First of all, I have never heard anyone use the term patrol carbine. I hear it referred to as an AR-15 regardless of who is carrying it.

If you want to know why cops often choose this gun then google it. There are many reasons and I’m not doing your homework for you. I will get you started though. One of the main reasons is that it has a greater chance of penetrating body armor. Those cops have to go through extensive training and pass tests to prove that they can handle such a powerful weapon. Then they have to demonstrate their skills at least once a year. So here’s a question for you. If highly trained and experienced law enforcement professionals have to prove they are qualified, why shouldn’t civilians need to do the same?

[/quote]
Most cops I know go to the range maybe half a dozen times a year, usually to practice right before their annual qualifying drill.

I go to the range at least twice a month, sometimes twice a week during competition season and in warm weather, if I can find the time.

In over ten years I've never met any law enforcement officer who could outshoot me, local, state or federal.

Just because it's part of your job to carry a gun doesn't mean you're proficient or some kind of expert. It just means that you've demonstrated you're capable of passing the [b]absolute minimum standard [/b]for the job. [/quote]

Why shouldn’t civilians need to pass that absolute minimum standard? 
[/quote]

If you're referring to CCW I do think there should be a proficiency standard rather than a safety standard.  Mandatory time spent on a simulator system would be a good idea.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics