Why own an AR-15?

[CitadelGrad]

Even the Army doesn't use a 3-round burst anymore. They thought it was a good idea, then decided that it wasn't.

[ASUG8]

Better yet, what is the difference between this:



and this?



Other than looks?

Not a damn thing.

Only racists think the black one is more dangerous.

The black one IS bigger, so myth confirmed.

[Ibanez]

I agree here - is there any weapon legal today that is anything more than a single trigger pull/single shot? Automatic weapons have been restricted and banned for decades.

Yes it is the most common misconception regarding firearms.

Yes. I read up on guns and figured out where my misunderstandings were. Essentially, this new ban is a cosmetic bill. Lets ban the mean looking gun even though its no different than the traditional rifle.

[Col Hogan]

I'm all for car ownership but can someone give me a good reason to have to own an Lamborghini? Seems that type of car doesn't have a purpose aside from being fun to drive. Those that drive it, in states that allow it, should use a real family car, not a Lamborghini. Family use? A Chevy or a Ford is just as effective.

I just don't see the need for them and why its a big deal to ban them.

See how that works???

[death dealer]

The proper response is because the 2nd amendment says I can and its none of anyone's damn business what I do or do not own as long as I don't harm anyone else.

[GannonFan]

Yes it is the most common misconception regarding firearms.

Yes. I read up on guns and figured out where my misunderstandings were. Essentially, this new ban is a cosmetic bill. Lets ban the mean looking gun even though its no different than the traditional rifle.

That's essentially what the now expired Assault Weapons ban was - a well intentioned law that did virtually nothing to improve gun safety.

If we're going to do something, it has to be better thought out and handled than what we've done before. Slapping a law in place that addresses nothing doesn't help anyone.

[danefan]

Don't you gun guys think there is a distinct advantage to a guy in a situation like this that does not have to reload as often with a large capacity magazine?

Looks of the weapon aside, is there a legitimate need for a large capacity magazine?

[Col Hogan]

Don't you gun guys think there is a distinct advantage to a guy in a situation like this that does not have to reload as often with a large capacity magazine?

Looks of the weapon aside, is there a legitimate need for a large capacity magazine?

Dane, I asked you this in a previous thread and you ignored the question...so I'll try again...

Since when is "legitimate need" a question to be asked about any legal item???

[bison95]

Don't you gun guys think there is a distinct advantage to a guy in a situation like this that does not have to reload as often with a large capacity magazine?

Looks of the weapon aside, is there a legitimate need for a large capacity magazine?

Depends how crazy your exwife is

[danefan]

Don't you gun guys think there is a distinct advantage to a guy in a situation like this that does not have to reload as often with a large capacity magazine?

Looks of the weapon aside, is there a legitimate need for a large capacity magazine?

Dane, I asked you this in a previous thread and you ignored the question...so I'll try again...

Since when is "legitimate need" a question to be asked about any legal item???

I'm questioning whether it should be legal by asking what the purpose is. Don't generalize all items in society. I'm talking about one particular item - high capacity magazines.

We know what the illegitimate purpose is - you can kill a whole bunch of kids really quickly.

What is the legitimate purpose? At some point society needs to weight the pros and cons and decide whether the cons are great enough to outlaw an item.

[Grizalltheway]

Don't you gun guys think there is a distinct advantage to a guy in a situation like this that does not have to reload as often with a large capacity magazine?

Looks of the weapon aside, is there a legitimate need for a large capacity magazine?

Dane, I asked you this in a previous thread and you ignored the question...so I'll try again...

Since when is "legitimate need" a question to be asked about any legal item???

I don't know, maybe since it became acceptable to question the legitimacy of a rape?

[Col Hogan]

Dane, I asked you this in a previous thread and you ignored the question...so I'll try again...

Since when is "legitimate need" a question to be asked about any legal item???

I'm questioning whether it should be legal by asking what the purpose is. Don't generalize all items in society. I'm talking about one particular item - high capacity magazines.

We know what the illegitimate purpose is - you can kill a whole bunch of kids really quickly.

What is the legitimate purpose? At some point society needs to weight the pros and cons and decide whether the cons are great enough to outlaw an item.

By your question you indicate to me that you disapprove and most likely will dismiss any answer I give as inadequate due the needs of the many...

I shoot competitions based around (among other things) a 30 round standard military magazine...

I consider that very legitimate as it is a stress reliever for me and I enjoy it...you might or might not, but I won't judge that...

[Col Hogan]

Dane, I asked you this in a previous thread and you ignored the question...so I'll try again...

Since when is "legitimate need" a question to be asked about any legal item???

I don't know, maybe since it became acceptable to question the legitimacy of a rape?

You may find that acceptable but I don't,,,

[death dealer]

Dane, I asked you this in a previous thread and you ignored the question...so I'll try again...

Since when is "legitimate need" a question to be asked about any legal item???

I don't know, maybe since it became acceptable to question the legitimacy of a rape?

Don't muddy the water. That has nothing to do with this, and you know it. It simply enforces the appearance that you have no legitimate argument.

[∞∞∞]

The overriding question here isn't about AR-15s and whatnot, but it's how can we take care of our fellow citizens, even the ones with deep psychological issues? You can ban guns as much as you want, but the safest societies are the ones that look out for their fellow men. The difference between the US and other countries which have similar gun laws and lower death rates is cultural, not political.

[Col Hogan]

The overriding question here isn't about AR-15s and whatnot, but it's how can we take care of our fellow citizens, even the ones with deep psychological issues? You can ban guns as much as you want, but the safest societies are the ones that look out for their fellow men. The difference between the US and other countries which have similar gun laws and lower death rates is cultural, not political.

+ 1

[death dealer]

The overriding question here isn't about AR-15s and whatnot, but it's how can we take care of our fellow citizens, even the ones with deep psychological issues? You can ban guns as much as you want, but the safest societies are the ones that look out for their fellow men. The difference between the US and other countries which have similar gun laws and lower death rates is cultural, not political.

This.

[UNI88]

The overriding question here isn't about AR-15s and whatnot, but it's how can we take care of our fellow citizens, even the ones with deep psychological issues? You can ban guns as much as you want, but the safest societies are the ones that look out for their fellow men. The difference between the US and other countries which have similar gun laws and lower death rates is cultural, not political.

This.

Well said!

[Grizalltheway]

Yeah, and look where being an uber-individualistic, predominantly Christian nation has gotten us.

[slycat]

Yeah, and look where being an uber-individualistic, predominantly Christian nation has gotten us.

Christianity has nothing to do with it

[death dealer]

Yeah, and look where being an uber-individualistic, predominantly Christian nation has gotten us.

Where exactly has it gotten us? Still the best damn place on Earth to hang your hat. You volunteering to move to Syria, China, India, Mexico, Venezuela? No? Maybe France?

[andy7171]

Yeah, and look where being an uber-individualistic, predominantly Christian nation has gotten us.

This post reminds me that GATW is still below 25 years of age.

[danefan]

I'm questioning whether it should be legal by asking what the purpose is. Don't generalize all items in society. I'm talking about one particular item - high capacity magazines.

We know what the illegitimate purpose is - you can kill a whole bunch of kids really quickly.

What is the legitimate purpose? At some point society needs to weight the pros and cons and decide whether the cons are great enough to outlaw an item.

By your question you indicate to me that you disapprove and most likely will dismiss any answer I give as inadequate due the needs of the many...

I shoot competitions based around (among other things) a 30 round standard military magazine...

I consider that very legitimate as it is a stress reliever for me and I enjoy it...you might or might not, but I won't judge that...

Col I respect you, but why can't you burn off stress without a 30 round magazine?

This is just my opinion, but I don't think stress relief is enough of a benefit to our society to outweigh the negatives. Maybe I'm just lost in this somehow.

How many kids get killed if he had to reload after 3 shots? I don't know. Maybe 10 less? Maybe 1?

Is it really worth it to even take this risk in our society?

[danefan]

The overriding question here isn't about AR-15s and whatnot, but it's how can we take care of our fellow citizens, even the ones with deep psychological issues? You can ban guns as much as you want, but the safest societies are the ones that look out for their fellow men. The difference between the US and other countries which have similar gun laws and lower death rates is cultural, not political.

I agree, but you can't change a culture overnight. As I said in my very first post on this, our society has proven that we are not responsible enough to have the unchecked freedom of keeping these sort of deadly weapons.

What is so egregious about working on mental health issue while at the same time limiting access to the most dangerous weapons? Why do they need to be mutually exclusive?

[DSUrocks07]

The overriding question here isn't about AR-15s and whatnot, but it's how can we take care of our fellow citizens, even the ones with deep psychological issues? You can ban guns as much as you want, but the safest societies are the ones that look out for their fellow men. The difference between the US and other countries which have similar gun laws and lower death rates is cultural, not political.

I agree, but you can't change a culture overnight. As I said in my very first post on this, our society has proven that we are not responsible enough to have the unchecked freedom of keeping these sort of deadly weapons.

What is so egregious about working on mental health issue while at the same time limiting access to the most dangerous weapons? Why do they need to be mutually exclusive?

But who determines what are the "most dangerous" and where do you draw the line? All it takes to kill one person is one bullet.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2