Gun control debate (merged)

[K-town Vol Fan]

Thing is, we don’t have to.

And there it is, muh rites

 

[DC_Vol]

A well armed population can’t be suppressed by a tyrannical government. It’s not so much about winning a war as not being overcome. I’m sure some moron will say something about fighter jets in response to your post but it will show a profound lack of understanding in what that conflict would look like. Russia is struggling to overrun a neighbor where they don’t have to care about the damage they create. Can you imagine trying to fight the American people while trying to maintain a country?

Look at Ukraine. It’s one of many reasons a well armed populace is important.

 

[DC_Vol]

And there it is, muh rites

Exactly.

 

[0nelilreb]

That's like saying every car is designed to have the same top speed and the only factor is the driver,
In other words.....that's complete nonsense.

Sit your car out in the yard for ten years and don’t touch it , it’s only a tool . The operator decides how fast the car goes . That’s why your speedometer starts at 0 and goes to the maximum the car the run . Get the picture yet ? Tools are worthless without the operator .

 

[C-south]

Why don't you just provide the definition you would like to see people use?
If you can't, or don't, then your request is overruled.

 

[Orangeslice13]

And there it is, muh rites

Don’t like it?
Change the 2a. can’t get that done? Then learn to live with it

 

[hog88]

I agree with OP. Hand guns and long rifles, thats it. Ban high capacity mags. No one on this board can come up with a valid reason they need an AR except for "muh rites'

Have you ever hunted wild hogs? Coyotes?

 

[hog88]

That doesn't sound crazy at all.

Our FFs were batshiz crazy. Good thing they had the firepower to match their government.

 

[SamRebel35]

I've got one: To have as close to matching fire power as I can to government officials.

The left: You don't need those guns. Your high capacity semiautomatic rifle won't help you against the government anyway.

Also the left: Ban high capacity semiautomatic rifles because government officials can't stop a shooter who is using them.

 

[luthervol]

Sit your car out in the yard for ten years and don’t touch it , it’s only a tool . The operator decides how fast the car goes . That’s why your speedometer starts at 0 and goes to the maximum the car the run . Get the picture yet ? Tools are worthless without the operator .

Different models of cars are designed differently. To be driven differently. To appeal to a different driver.
And you know it.
The maximum speed of a car is determined by it's design.

 

[0nelilreb]

Different models of cars are designed differently. To be driven differently. To appeal to a different driver.
And you know it.
The maximum speed of a car is determined by it's design.

All of them start at zero and will not move off of that zero until the operator decides what speed he wants to drive .. same with firearms .we don’t have a gun problem .

 

[rjd970]

To clarify, I was under the impression that assault rifles were already nearly impossible for non-military or LE to obtain. Has something changed?

Underrated post.

Somebody needs to clearly define “assault rifle”. At this point I don’t even know what they mean when they say it.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

Our FFs were batshiz crazy. Good thing they had the firepower to match their government.

So your example of why we need ARs is 250 years old?

 

[loggervol]

Yes please, lets make people less safe.

 

[hog88]

So your example of why we need ARs is 250 years old?

Same 250 year old reason for the 1st amendment. Or do you disagree that we should be able to speak out against our government also?

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

Same 250 year old reason for the 1st amendment. Or do you disagree that we should be able to speak out against our government also?

Doesn't apply. What kind of guns were they using 250 years ago?

 

[hog88]

Doesn't apply. What kind of guns were they using 250 years ago?

Absolutely applies.

The same, actually better weapons than what the government possessed.

 

[DinkinFlicka]

Doesn't apply. What kind of guns were they using 250 years ago?

What kind of guns was the government armed with 250 years ago?

 

[C-south]

Doesn't apply. What kind of guns were they using 250 years ago?

The same as the people they were having to fight for freedom.

 

[loggervol]

Doesn't apply. What kind of guns were they using 250 years ago?

Well, it did keep the Japanese from attacking the mainland US. I think that's what the founders had in mind.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

Well, it did keep the Japanese from attacking the mainland US. I think that's what the founders had in mind.

Well we have a military for that now.

 

[OrangeTsar]

I used x and y for a reason.

Because you know that any attempt to actually define something and go on the record would subject you to instant and justified ridicule?
It is easy to argue non specifics.

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

Well we have a military for that now.

 

[C-south]

Well we have a military for that now.

So did the British.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Doesn't apply. What kind of guns were they using 250 years ago?

Works for the first Amendment too. The founders were thinking of printing presses, not computers and smart phones. So please turn yours in and go buy a bundle of goose quills and an ink well, ok???