Anonymous wrote:'Anonymous wrote:you realize musket wounds are even worse? If you survive the shot you died of infection due to the low velocity and all the germs on the clothing that entered the wound . Also you saY nobodody is banning hunting rifles. But now you oppose rifles period. So you want people to hunt with handguns? What do you actually want?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses
I care about rifle wounds because they are most difficult to survive, especially for kids. Working in healthcare, it's very clear people survive handgun wounds (unless to brain/heart of course) far easier than rifle wounds.
I care about guns in general because even if criminals turn to knives, at least I won't have to check my sleeping child anymore to ensure a bullet didn't penetrate their window (and yes, I've had to check my sleeping child due to gun shots in my alley and know of neighbors who found bullets that penetrated windows). At least fewer bystanders caught in targeted drive by shootings; you have to be up close and personal to get a knife wound in.
We can start with raising the purchasing age to 21 for all guns, not just handguns. Don't give me the "what about military age" crap answer, either, I have family who are military at under age 21, but even military base carry is restricted and they get screened just to enter the military, then extensive training. Not the same.
'Anonymous wrote:you realize musket wounds are even worse? If you survive the shot you died of infection due to the low velocity and all the germs on the clothing that entered the wound . Also you saY nobodody is banning hunting rifles. But now you oppose rifles period. So you want people to hunt with handguns? What do you actually want?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses
I care about rifle wounds because they are most difficult to survive, especially for kids. Working in healthcare, it's very clear people survive handgun wounds (unless to brain/heart of course) far easier than rifle wounds.
I care about guns in general because even if criminals turn to knives, at least I won't have to check my sleeping child anymore to ensure a bullet didn't penetrate their window (and yes, I've had to check my sleeping child due to gun shots in my alley and know of neighbors who found bullets that penetrated windows). At least fewer bystanders caught in targeted drive by shootings; you have to be up close and personal to get a knife wound in.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Interesting opinion piece (written by former police officer) about why it's crazy we let civilians buy AR-15s.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/05/opinions/guns-ar-15-uvalde-school-shooting-fanone/index.html
Idiot troll-thread from the resident crazy-lady.
Ignore.
Sure, ignore the problem (one of many)
The Constitution is a problem to you??
Oye veh! You are even more insane than I already thought.
The Constitution famously does not mention AR-15s.
Correct. And what happens in the future when technology advances even more? What if future guns are like laser guns (think: star wars light sabers). That are just able to vaporize a human in a split second. Will we still bring up "the constitution" and "2nd amendment rights"?? When will the insanity end?!?
you realize musket wounds are even worse? If you survive the shot you died of infection due to the low velocity and all the germs on the clothing that entered the wound . Also you saY nobodody is banning hunting rifles. But now you oppose rifles period. So you want people to hunt with handguns? What do you actually want?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses
I care about rifle wounds because they are most difficult to survive, especially for kids. Working in healthcare, it's very clear people survive handgun wounds (unless to brain/heart of course) far easier than rifle wounds.
I care about guns in general because even if criminals turn to knives, at least I won't have to check my sleeping child anymore to ensure a bullet didn't penetrate their window (and yes, I've had to check my sleeping child due to gun shots in my alley and know of neighbors who found bullets that penetrated windows). At least fewer bystanders caught in targeted drive by shootings; you have to be up close and personal to get a knife wound in.
Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses
Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses
Anonymous wrote:No one has talked about “family values” since 1985, grandma.
Except you.
Anonymous wrote:Most of the liberal arguments are based on emotion and talking points. They have zero understanding about firearms. I showed libs pictures of 3006, .308win and .223 next to each other and asked them which one would they ban. They all say 3006, and have no idea the smallest one, the .223 is the one the ar-15 uses
Anonymous wrote:Weird how only 1 of 6 mass shootings this weekend involved an ar-15 and only one got substantial media coverage
Anonymous wrote:Conservatives scream about loss of "family values" and dangerous books in schools, but are totally cool with sending holiday cards of their entire family holding guns, or ads with toddlers holding guns like this one.
Anonymous wrote:its a civilian firearm . Or can you show us which military uses the AR-15?Anonymous wrote:Interesting opinion piece (written by former police officer) about why it's crazy we let civilians buy AR-15s.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/05/opinions/guns-ar-15-uvalde-school-shooting-fanone/index.html