The fact that I cannot see a legitimate argument being made for it being a weapon of self-defense. Unlike smaller pistols, which I can understand to a degree.
What purpose does this serve then?Jenspm wrote:
The fact that I cannot see a legitimate argument being made for it being a weapon of self-defense. Unlike smaller pistols, which I can understand to a degree.
or this
Last edited by Jay (2012-12-15 10:58:14)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I have no idea. What is it?
Hunting? Why would you want any rifle? There's nothing special about an AR-15. It's a semi-automatic .223 caliber rifle. It's good for shooting at a range or plinking small game like coyotes or rabbits. The two rifles above are .207 cal and .22 cal respectively. They perform the same function.Jenspm wrote:
I have no idea. What is it?
So why would you single out the AR-15?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Who hunts with an AR-15?
Plenty of people? Or they go to the range for target practice. Why does it matter?AussieReaper wrote:
Who hunts with an AR-15?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
From my facebook wall:
He looks happy
He looks happy
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
13rin you are such a fucking idiot and without fail you prove this every time you try and respond to someone. I'm not going to counter anything you wrote because I'd have to wade through too many fucking misapprehensions and you'd be too fucking stupid to take on any corrections I made anyway. Just let me say that once again you made an ass-backwards and incorrect interpretation and came across as a gibbering redneck simpleton who lacks any ability to communicate beyond grunts and wild hand gestures. Well done on that.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Its more a case of why you need a semi-auto military-grade rifle (that could be converted to automatic with the time and tools) to go hunting when you could just use a bolt action rifle designed for hunting. I imagine someone would be less likely to use one of those in a spree shooting than something like an AR-15 unless they went all Washington sniper bunking in the trunk.Jay wrote:
Plenty of people? Or they go to the range for target practice. Why does it matter?AussieReaper wrote:
Who hunts with an AR-15?
Last edited by M.O.A.B (2012-12-15 15:11:44)
I would use my AR-15 to hunt, you just have to be a more precise shot with larger game.
Any semi-automatic can be converted to fully automatic with the time and tools. They even sell books on Amazon that show you how to do so: http://www.amazon.com/The-Do---Yourself … ine+pistolM.O.A.B wrote:
Its more a case of why you need a semi-auto military-grade rifle (that could be converted to automatic with the time and tools) to go hunting when you could just use a bolt action rifle designed for hunting. I imagine someone would be less likely to use one of those in a spree shooting than something like an AR-15 unless they went all Washington sniper bunking in the trunk.Jay wrote:
Plenty of people? Or they go to the range for target practice. Why does it matter?AussieReaper wrote:
Who hunts with an AR-15?
There's nothing special about the AR-15. Frankly, anytime the phrase 'assault rifle' is used when referring to civilian firearms it marks the person as an ignorant fool in the eyes of people with experience.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Personally, I won't ever own an AR-15 because I think they're rather useless. Can't hunt well with them, impractical for home defense, and they're expensive. Their saving grace is that they are easy to operate and have almost no kick to them. The primary benefit they seem to provide is the fact that they terrify lefties. Almost makes it worth the money... almost.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I only own one because I keep thinking I'll have time to get my "President's Hundred" tab sometime eventually maybe.Jay wrote:
Personally, I won't ever own an AR-15 because I think they're rather useless. Can't hunt well with them, impractical for home defense, and they're expensive. Their saving grace is that they are easy to operate and have almost no kick to them. The primary benefit they seem to provide is the fact that they terrify lefties. Almost makes it worth the money... almost.
They're okay for varmint & pest control. But then again, so is a 7mm Magnum bolt action rifle.
jesus wept, what do you consider a pest?rdx-fx wrote:
They're okay for varmint & pest control. But then again, so is a 7mm Magnum bolt action rifle.
Think you answered that one yourselfJay wrote:
Plenty of people? Or they go to the range for target practice. Why does it matter?AussieReaper wrote:
Who hunts with an AR-15?
Jay wrote:
Can't hunt well with them, impractical for home defense, and they're expensive.
And you haven't explained what makes the weapon special to you. It's just a semi-automatic rifle, there are hundreds of different varieties on the market. Most of them are better weapons than the AR-15 is. We're talking about fifty year old technology here. And I said that I personally wouldn't want to own one. I don't hunt. Other people seem to find them enjoyable though, shrug.AussieReaper wrote:
Think you answered that one yourselfJay wrote:
Plenty of people? Or they go to the range for target practice. Why does it matter?AussieReaper wrote:
Who hunts with an AR-15?Jay wrote:
Can't hunt well with them, impractical for home defense, and they're expensive.
Last edited by Jay (2012-12-15 15:54:25)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
If a gun isn't practical for home defense or hunting, why should it be on the market?
Especially one so dangerous as a semi-automatic that can be easily modified.
Especially one so dangerous as a semi-automatic that can be easily modified.
Why shouldn't it be on the market? Why does Apple sell iPhones? It's just a brand. Why get your panties in a twist over one weapon among many? It makes you look stupid.AussieReaper wrote:
If a gun isn't practical for home defense or hunting, why should it be on the market?
Especially one so dangerous as a semi-automatic that can be easily modified.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Rugers, innit.Jay wrote:
Why shouldn't it be on the market? Why does Apple sell iPhones? It's just a brand. Why get your panties in a twist over one weapon among many? It makes you look stupid.AussieReaper wrote:
If a gun isn't practical for home defense or hunting, why should it be on the market?
Especially one so dangerous as a semi-automatic that can be easily modified.
I'm glad you found that funny.. I really had meant to put there below it that the renewal period had been changed from 5 to 7 years. I actually had it done the same way the DMV works, but it was easier. That was new too. Pure win...Jenspm wrote:
I find it funny that that you call Ty and "internet tough guy" and then follow it up with a 'fuck you' picture with your CWP like the testo-macho manly man you are.
I also like that you use the fact that it happened in a state with the fifth most restrictive gun laws as some sort of proof that gun laws don't work, without considering the fact that this is the fifth most restrictive state in a country of fifty that happens to have by far the biggest proliferation of fire arms amongst the civilian population in the world.
And then you, like several others, use the fact that it happened ONCE in Norway as further proof, ignoring the fact that it was the only incident of its kind since the Second World War. I'd say that's a far better track record than the US (not that that is proof of my stance, either).
Anyways.
Regarding your dismissive retort with respect to firearm polerifation, it doesn't matter. Those laws are just about the same as many in eurofag land. They failed. Oh and, as Jay stated look to Mexico's firearms regulations and how bad gun crimes are down there then. Gun control laws merely remove guns from the hands of law abiding people. Sorry it's that fucking simple.
You act like there are no shootings in euroland. How about these guys then?
http://www.expatica.com/be/news/local_n … 95344.html
Yea... No. Those gun restrictions are really working out.
Nothing to do with that. 2nd amendment.As I argued in the other thread, I understand that you cannot simply take guns away from your citizens if they don't feel you can protect them well enough. I think some people are paranoid on that front (I had a neighbour in texas who slept with a gun under his pillow every night in one of the safest neighborhoods in the state), but I guess that's a side-effect of the gun culture that's been created.
I can answer that with one 1 word.I understand that as long as the baddies have guns and your people don't feel secure, you can't remove the guns they want to use for self-defence. But as I said in the other thread, what kind of situation do you expect to be in where you need a gun like this for self-defence?
Katrina.
I live in an area where that scenario is totally possible. Look at what happened in New Orleans. Roving bands of thugs (rogue cops too) raped looted and pillaged at will. Why would I need an AR? Why wouldn't you? I'm prepared enough to endure such a natural disaster. Others sadly are not. During times like that people like me become targets because I have what they don't (food, gas, water, generator, etc). If you think that during a lawless time of disaster your neighbor is going to just knock on your door and ask to borrow and egg, cup of milk, or gallon of gas, then you're just as delusional as the person who thinks they can come take it from me.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
I'm not arguing for one gun over many. I'm arguing that the guns which are impracticable shouldn't be on the market.Jay wrote:
Why shouldn't it be on the market? Why does Apple sell iPhones? It's just a brand. Why get your panties in a twist over one weapon among many? It makes you look stupid.AussieReaper wrote:
If a gun isn't practical for home defense or hunting, why should it be on the market?
Especially one so dangerous as a semi-automatic that can be easily modified.
This isn't preventing hunters or home defense people from doing their thing. It's limiting the semi-auto weapons which have no practicable use.
As you said yourself, this gun isn't something you'd take hunting or use as home defense.
Yeah, but even then, there are much better weapons for that kind of situation. The primary benefit with the AR-15 is that people recognize it, are scared of it, and will think twice before approaching someone armed with one. That's what you're really paying for when you buy that weapon.13rin wrote:
I can answer that with one 1 word.
Katrina.
I live in an area where that scenario is totally possible. Look at what happened in New Orleans. Roving bands of thugs (rogue cops too) raped looted and pillaged at will. Why would I need an AR? Why wouldn't you? I'm prepared enough to endure such a natural disaster. Others sadly are not. During times like that people like me become targets because I have what they don't (food, gas, water, generator, etc). If you think that during a lawless time of disaster your neighbor is going to just knock on your door and ask to borrow and egg, cup of milk, or gallon of gas, then you're just as delusional as the person who thinks they can come take it from me.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
What makes it impractical? I said it's impractical for my purposes. So are machine guns, revolvers, and a 12 lber cannon. So what? People buy inferior products every day of the week. Should we ban cheap razors when people can go to the barber shop and get a better shave there? Your logic is ludicrous.AussieReaper wrote:
I'm not arguing for one gun over many. I'm arguing that the guns which are impracticable shouldn't be on the market.Jay wrote:
Why shouldn't it be on the market? Why does Apple sell iPhones? It's just a brand. Why get your panties in a twist over one weapon among many? It makes you look stupid.AussieReaper wrote:
If a gun isn't practical for home defense or hunting, why should it be on the market?
Especially one so dangerous as a semi-automatic that can be easily modified.
This isn't preventing hunters or home defense people from doing their thing. It's limiting the semi-auto weapons which have no practicable use.
As you said yourself, this gun isn't something you'd take hunting or use as home defense.
There's nothing wrong with semi-automatic weapons. Every handgun in the world is a semi-automatic. You pull the trigger, it cycles a round and fires. Are you really advocating that every gun in the world that isn't a muzzle-loader or bolt-action be banned? LOLOLOLOL. Good luck with that.
Last edited by Jay (2012-12-15 16:28:59)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
as previously stated, i'm a gun owner. i live in THE least restrictive state in the Union (Utah). i feel there should be discourse concerning gun ownership, and the right s of individuals attached to said ownership.13rin wrote:
Nothing to do with that. 2nd amendment.
i am completely legal. i have the firepower and the ammunition to recreate the tragedy that just happened in Connecticut.
why do people flock to the 2nd Amendment when we have both a !st Amendment and a Preamble?
is that your legal defense?
Why so scared to have a discussion?
is the political divide so deep that American's can't reach a consensus on anything, that everything has to be all or nothing?
WTF?
Feel like I'm repeating myself here, because you're just too dumb to read what I write.Jay wrote:
What makes it impractical? I said it's impractical for my purposes. So are machine guns, revolvers, and a 12 lber cannon. So what? People buy inferior products every day of the week. Should we ban cheap razors when people can go to the barber shop and get a better shave there? Your logic is ludicrous.AussieReaper wrote:
I'm not arguing for one gun over many. I'm arguing that the guns which are impracticable shouldn't be on the market.Jay wrote:
Why shouldn't it be on the market? Why does Apple sell iPhones? It's just a brand. Why get your panties in a twist over one weapon among many? It makes you look stupid.
This isn't preventing hunters or home defense people from doing their thing. It's limiting the semi-auto weapons which have no practicable use.
As you said yourself, this gun isn't something you'd take hunting or use as home defense.
There's nothing wrong with semi-automatic weapons. Every handgun in the world is a semi-automatic. You pull the trigger, it cycles a round and fires. Are you really advocating that every gun in the world that isn't a muzzle-loader or bolt-action be banned? LOLOLOLOL. Good luck with that.
If a gun isn't practical for home defense or hunting, why should it be on the market?
Sidenote: revolvers you can hunt with, and many people do.