Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I'm all for gun ownership but can someone give me a good reason to have to own an AR-15? Seems that type of gun doesn't have a purpose aside from being fun to shoot. Those that hunt with it, in states that allow it, should use a real hunting gun a not an AR-15. Family protection? A pistol or shotgun is just as effective.

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

Though one could argue that banning them before didn't stop other gunbs from being used in Columbine or other mass shootings.

You should probably remember that purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to protect hunters' rights.

What do you think the difference is between an AR-15 and any other semi-automatic rifle that fires a .22 round? Why do you focus on the AR-15?

NVM found a thread about this. Its ok because the US military will turn on us and we need to have the same weapons to fight back. Yeah ok.

I forgot Obama was going to attack US citizens and there will be an uprising. I heard this statement in 2008 when he was elected the first time. Still waiting....

CitadelGrad wrote:You should probably remember that purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to protect hunters' rights.

What do you think the difference is between an AR-15 and any other semi-automatic rifle that fires a .22 round? Why do you focus on the AR-15?

I have an old semi-auto .22 hunting rifle. Holds 15 rounds. No clip. Have to load each by hand. An AR-15 has no purpose for hunting. What is the purpose of the AR-15? I guess that is the question I am asking.

slycat wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:You should probably remember that purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to protect hunters' rights.

What do you think the difference is between an AR-15 and any other semi-automatic rifle that fires a .22 round? Why do you focus on the AR-15?

I have an old semi-auto .22 hunting rifle. Holds 15 rounds. No clip. Have to load each by hand. An AR-15 has no purpose for hunting. What is the purpose of the AR-15? I guess that is the question I am asking.

You must be the dumbest fucker around. I hunt with one, I have 4 friends that hunt with the. Deer, elk, gophers, coyotes, gophers, etc...

CitadelGrad wrote:You should probably remember that purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to protect hunters' rights.

What do you think the difference is between an AR-15 and any other semi-automatic rifle that fires a .22 round? Why do you focus on the AR-15?

You are correct that the 2nd Amendment is not for hunting. Its for well maintianed militias. I don't think many people fall into that. The Supreme Court ruled otherwise.

Like I said. I am for gun ownership. Just looking for where you draw the line with types of guns you can own. is it an AR-15? .50 cal sniper rifle? Fully automatic machine guns? Gattling guns?

grizzaholic wrote:

slycat wrote:
I have an old semi-auto .22 hunting rifle. Holds 15 rounds. No clip. Have to load each by hand. An AR-15 has no purpose for hunting. What is the purpose of the AR-15? I guess that is the question I am asking.

You must be the dumbest fucker around. I hunt with one, I have 4 friends that hunt with the. Deer, elk, gophers, coyotes, gophers, etc...

I love educated responses. Many people say the AR-15 takes the sport out of hunting. But if its good for it then thats a good argument.

slycat wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
You must be the dumbest fucker around. I hunt with one, I have 4 friends that hunt with the. Deer, elk, gophers, coyotes, gophers, etc...

I love educated responses. Many people say the AR-15 takes the sport out of hunting. But if its good for it then thats a good argument.

And how exactly does it take the sport out of hunting? I would love to hear the response.

Spoiler: show

FUCK, I cannot believe I got sucked back in with the idiots

slycat wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:You should probably remember that purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to protect hunters' rights.

What do you think the difference is between an AR-15 and any other semi-automatic rifle that fires a .22 round? Why do you focus on the AR-15?

I have an old semi-auto .22 hunting rifle. Holds 15 rounds. No clip. Have to load each by hand. An AR-15 has no purpose for hunting. What is the purpose of the AR-15? I guess that is the question I am asking.

Your old semi-auto .22 has a purpose for hunting but an AR-15 doesn't? They fire approximately the same caliber round and are both semi-auto. So what is the distinction between them?

slycat wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:You should probably remember that purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to protect hunters' rights.

What do you think the difference is between an AR-15 and any other semi-automatic rifle that fires a .22 round? Why do you focus on the AR-15?

You are correct that the 2nd Amendment is not for hunting. Its for well maintianed militias. I don't think many people fall into that. The Supreme Court ruled otherwise.

Like I said. I am for gun ownership. Just looking for where you draw the line with types of guns you can own. is it an AR-15? .50 cal sniper rifle? Fully automatic machine guns? Gattling guns?

It isn't only the Supreme Court that believes otherwise.

"The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
Alexander Hamilton
The Federalist Papers at 184-8

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

slycat wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
You must be the dumbest fucker around. I hunt with one, I have 4 friends that hunt with the. Deer, elk, gophers, coyotes, gophers, etc...

I love educated responses. Many people say the AR-15 takes the sport out of hunting. But if its good for it then thats a good argument.

What's the purpose?

Better yet, what is the difference between this:



and this?



Other than looks?

Not a damn thing.

grizzaholic wrote:

slycat wrote:
I love educated responses. Many people say the AR-15 takes the sport out of hunting. But if its good for it then thats a good argument.

And how exactly does it take the sport out of hunting? I would love to hear the response.

Spoiler: show

FUCK, I cannot believe I got sucked back in with the idiots

Heres a good article backing your point

http://cheaperthandirt.com/blog/?p=4501" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Does say it could be considered overkill but makes a valid point.

I was looking for a valid point to use in debates for why its needed. Guess I should have googled first

slycat wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
And how exactly does it take the sport out of hunting? I would love to hear the response.

Spoiler: show

FUCK, I cannot believe I got sucked back in with the idiots

Heres a good article backing your point

http://cheaperthandirt.com/blog/?p=4501" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Does say it could be considered overkill but makes a valid point.

I was looking for a valid point to use in debates for why its needed. Guess I should have googled first

The one I own has a 22" barrel and when the stock is collapsed it is much shorter, OAL, than a standard hunting rifle. Which makes it much easier to pack, move through the woods, etc.. I am not saying I use it for everything, but I do like the option of grabbing that instead of a 7mmSTW or .300 H&H.

slycat wrote:I love educated responses. Many people say the AR-15 takes the sport out of hunting. But if its good for it then thats a good argument.

Bow hunting is not for everyone. Many times bow hunters bring a gun along to protect them from a wounded animal that could charge them. Depends on what you are hunting. I would like an AR-15 in bear country for sure.

I could be wrong, but I've heard that the AR-15 is essentially the same thing as the military's M-16. If that's the case, the problem might be the three-round burst capability. While that alone wouldn't classify it as an "assault weapon," (a weapon that cuts off after three rounds can hardly be called "automatic") I can see where that might cause a problem with the sport aspect of hunting.

If that IS the issue, then the proper thing would be to either have that mode disabled or have a version made at the factory without it. We're not talking about the destructive capability of a 7.62mm round (M-14); it's the much less destructive 5.56mm round. If you're hunting for the sport of it, you don't want to come back with a destroyed carcass; you generally want to be able to skin the animal, eat the meat, and perhaps use the coat and/or head to make a trophy or a rug. You can't do that if it's been destroyed by an excessively large round or by a wall of bullets. Hunters take pride in "one shot, one kill." Besides, that saves money in terms of buying rounds, and perhaps in cleaning materials. This practice also gives the animal a fair shot at getting away, thus enhancing the "sport" aspect of hunting.

Agreed that hunting doesn't "officially" come under the Second Amendment, but as a nation we have traditionally fed ourselves at least partly through hunting. I don't personally have the temperament for hunting, but that should not stand in the way of people who grew up hunting. Those who grow up with a proper respect for weapons (hunting, target practice, etc.) generally don't turn into the blood-thirsty psychopaths that perpetrate mass murders. So, a psych check, yes. A ban SPECIFICALLY on a tightly-defined group of "assault weapons," yes. An outright ban, no.

SuperHornet wrote:I could be wrong, but I've heard that the AR-15 is essentially the same thing as the military's M-16. If that's the case, the problem might be the three-round burst capability.

This is where I stopped reading. Are you a retard or just dumb? Civilian AR15's don't have any burst anything. SEMI ONLY. Might be time to get out and live in the world instead of the basement of your church.

CitadelGrad wrote:

slycat wrote:
I have an old semi-auto .22 hunting rifle. Holds 15 rounds. No clip. Have to load each by hand. An AR-15 has no purpose for hunting. What is the purpose of the AR-15? I guess that is the question I am asking.

Your old semi-auto .22 has a purpose for hunting but an AR-15 doesn't? They fire approximately the same caliber round and are both semi-auto. So what is the distinction between them?

The AR looks like a military rifle.

Gil Dobie wrote:

slycat wrote:I love educated responses. Many people say the AR-15 takes the sport out of hunting. But if its good for it then thats a good argument.

Bow hunting is not for everyone. Many times bow hunters bring a gun along to protect them from a wounded animal that could charge them. Depends on what you are hunting. I would like an AR-15 in bear country for sure.

Makes sense in bear country. Not much worry around here unless you go to west Texas where there are some smaller bears and mountain lions.

grizzaholic wrote:

slycat wrote:
Heres a good article backing your point

http://cheaperthandirt.com/blog/?p=4501" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Does say it could be considered overkill but makes a valid point.

I was looking for a valid point to use in debates for why its needed. Guess I should have googled first

The one I own has a 22" barrel and when the stock is collapsed it is much shorter, OAL, than a standard hunting rifle. Which makes it much easier to pack, move through the woods, etc.. I am not saying I use it for everything, but I do like the option of grabbing that instead of a 7mmSTW or .300 H&H.

Thanks for the info

grizzaholic wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:I could be wrong, but I've heard that the AR-15 is essentially the same thing as the military's M-16. If that's the case, the problem might be the three-round burst capability.

This is where I stopped reading. Are you a retard or just dumb? Civilian AR15's don't have any burst anything. SEMI ONLY. Might be time to get out and live in the world instead of the basement of your church.

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.

GannonFan wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
This is where I stopped reading. Are you a retard or just dumb? Civilian AR15's don't have any burst anything. SEMI ONLY. Might be time to get out and live in the world instead of the basement of your church.

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.

grizzaholic wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:I could be wrong, but I've heard that the AR-15 is essentially the same thing as the military's M-16. If that's the case, the problem might be the three-round burst capability.

This is where I stopped reading. Are you a retard or just dumb? Civilian AR15's don't have any burst anything. SEMI ONLY. Might be time to get out and live in the world instead of the basement of your church.

If you quit reading at that point, you're an idiot, grizza, beacuse the rest of what I said essentially backs up you up. No burst, no problem.

SuperHornet wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
This is where I stopped reading. Are you a retard or just dumb? Civilian AR15's don't have any burst anything. SEMI ONLY. Might be time to get out and live in the world instead of the basement of your church.

If you quit reading at that point, you're an idiot, grizza, beacuse the rest of what I said essentially backs up you up. No burst, no problem.

It's the fact that you don't even know that the three-round-burst is illegal....

slycat wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
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.

That or the myth that a semi automatic AR-15 is somehow magically more deadly than a semi automatic .223 Winchester simply because it looks like a mean old military gun.

Baldy wrote: 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.