It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help me understand why people need assault rifles to protect themselves

page: 18
15
<< 15  16  17    19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: supamang

I've done a take down scenario in a building with an active shooter where we all had a limited number of sim rounds and a choice between the m4 AR or M9 semi service pistol. I grabbed a pistol and has able to hit the active shooter, a GM1(USN) who had a pistol in each hand.

No one who grabbed the m4s were able to hit the active shooter. Over and over with ASF(auxiliary security force) classes the result is the same. The pistol was the better weapon for this kind of SWAT raid scenario, this building was the size of a large house. While having riflemen posted around the perimeter is a good tactic, those who are most likely going to be pulling the trigger at close quarters do not need a large AR with rounds that can do collateral damage one mile down the road.




posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 01:13 AM
link   
Its like Nukes really. You got A an B. A makes a small one, then make a bigger one. Then the B learns how to make one whether its simple physic or chemistry, or atomic science. And makes their own, which is bigger then the team A. Then A makes a bigger one. And B makes another bigger one.

Ever heard the saying it not the size, but how you use it?
edit on 22-6-2014 by Specimen because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2014 by Specimen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Bill of rights,
not
Bill of needs.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Help me understand why the sheeple like yourself buy in the the msm of the word assault weapons. Civilian ar15 are mordern sporting rifles for hunting, recreation and home defense. Assault weapons are15 (M4) with 14 inch barrel fully automatic full mill spec. At least law abiding citizens should have a rifle that can fire more than one shot. Why the police state can have all the firepower? Why the criminals can have a stolen fully auto assault rifle but you cant have one for protection? Dont let history repear it's self.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: supamang

I've done a take down scenario in a building with an active shooter where we all had a limited number of sim rounds and a choice between the m4 AR or M9 semi service pistol. I grabbed a pistol and has able to hit the active shooter, a GM1(USN) who had a pistol in each hand.

No one who grabbed the m4s were able to hit the active shooter. Over and over with ASF(auxiliary security force) classes the result is the same. The pistol was the better weapon for this kind of SWAT raid scenario, this building was the size of a large house. While having riflemen posted around the perimeter is a good tactic, those who are most likely going to be pulling the trigger at close quarters do not need a large AR with rounds that can do collateral damage one mile down the road.


Are you serious?

Are you trying to compare a real event with are simulated game?

Please don't tell me you are serious...



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Specimen
Its like Nukes really. You got A an B. A makes a small one, then make a bigger one. Then the B learns how to make one whether its simple physic or chemistry, or atomic science. And makes their own, which is bigger then the team A. Then A makes a bigger one. And B makes another bigger one.

Ever heard the saying it not the size, but how you use it?


Are you an adult?

It would help to know if you are or have every been in the military...

A comic book will have better stories about this subject.

If you are a young man then please let us know so we don't waste our time trying to explain how real life works.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 04:34 PM
link   
I don't know why everyone is obsessed with the AR-15. Let me tell you a little something about AR-15's.

They fire either a .223 or NATO standard 5.56mm.

The hunting rifles sold at Walmart shoot .308's

Go ahead and google images a .223 or a 5.56; Then google images a .308.

you may notice the actual bullet in the casing of a .308 is considerably larger than a 5.56; Yet no one has an issue with them.

And no, not all hunting rifles are bolt-action. You can get a clip-fed .308 with twice the accuracy at distance of an ar-15, and no one has a single issue with these.

The only people who have an issue with guns are people who do not understand them.

No firearm equates to crime. PEOPLE equate to crime; Those types of people will always find access to the weapons they desire, legal or not.

The only people you're hurting by illegalizing them are law abiding citizens. The answer isn't less firearms, it's more.

You think if everyone was armed that criminals would be quick to rob someone? Knowing that everyone is armed? I think not.

You think all those people killed in Colorado (for example) would have died in that movie theater if they were all armed? I'm fairly certain they would have put numerous amounts of holes in dude before he could get many rounds off.

Basically what I am saying, is that is time to stop blaming inanimate objects from crimes. A gun doesn't just shoot someone. It's a tool utilized by a human being. The human being is the problem, not the inanimate object.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Yurimaster
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Help me understand why the sheeple like yourself buy in the the msm of the word assault weapons. Civilian ar15 are mordern sporting rifles for hunting, recreation and home defense. Assault weapons are15 (M4) with 14 inch barrel fully automatic full mill spec. At least law abiding citizens should have a rifle that can fire more than one shot. Why the police state can have all the firepower? Why the criminals can have a stolen fully auto assault rifle but you cant have one for protection? Dont let history repear it's self.



The majority of these people wouldn't know the difference between a belt-fed browning MG42 and a AA12 with an ammo drum. They hear buzz-words like "automatic", "30 round clip", "assault rifle" and they're sold on whatever political agenda is being crammed down their throats.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 06:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vortiki

The majority of these people wouldn't know the difference between a belt-fed browning MG42 and a AA12 with an ammo drum.


Browning didn't make the MG-42. Großfuß, Mauser-Werke, and Gustloff-Werke made it and it's variants (among others). Maybe you're thinking of the Browning 1919?
edit on 22-6-2014 by TuEsIncredibiliterStultus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: EyesOpenMouthShut

originally posted by: Loveaduck


This is a joke right? Ha, ha! I get it. Very funny sense of humor. I know you actually do know why they call them assault weapons. No one goes to a funeral when you assault a beer.
Oh really? people go to funerals when the beer can assaulter uses another tool. An automobile. maybe we should start calling them assault vehicles to make it more scary.



I don't get your point?



posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Look-it folks, The people that like guns are NOT telling the folks that don't like gun they must buy a gun!

If some mean big ass guy sticks a knife up your butt because you don't want to protect yourself or your family with a gun...So be it!

Just don't try to tell others that they must bend over and take it for the Gipper.

The right of self defense is a God given right recognized in our US constitution.

Live with it or move to another location... Just keep your sorry ass nose out of my soup!



posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: supamang

I've done a take down scenario in a building with an active shooter where we all had a limited number of sim rounds and a choice between the m4 AR or M9 semi service pistol. I grabbed a pistol and has able to hit the active shooter, a GM1(USN) who had a pistol in each hand.

No one who grabbed the m4s were able to hit the active shooter. Over and over with ASF(auxiliary security force) classes the result is the same. The pistol was the better weapon for this kind of SWAT raid scenario, this building was the size of a large house. While having riflemen posted around the perimeter is a good tactic, those who are most likely going to be pulling the trigger at close quarters do not need a large AR with rounds that can do collateral damage one mile down the road.


9mm with FMJ will penetrate drywall almost as far as 5.56--you don't get realistic concerns of collateral of one over the other.
5.56 with greater stopping power than 9mm at the same distances.

Handgun more maneuverable than carbine in close quarters.

M4 was almost all we used for house clearing in Iraq and did the job very, very well.

Use what works for you/what you are used to using.



posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Telling me that a 9mm handgun is going to be better at clearing a room than a m4 or a 10.3 inch mk18 is like telling me Barbra Streisand is more attractive than Taylor Cole, Bridgette Wilson in the 90's, or Joe Collins back in 1965. As a matter of fact, all of them combined.

Basically, you're lying to me. This isn't the movies or TV, you're not Jack Bauer.


edit on 24-6-2014 by TuEsIncredibiliterStultus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 09:29 PM
link   
I know how to clear a room real fast:
Just going low and slow, and that is what I do...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...



posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 09:40 PM
link   
To the OP, the answer is simple; it's because we can have the cool guns of our choice (within reason) and so those that like them, simply get them. My favorite was the mini-14 with a scope of course and merely for target practice. It's a hobby I enjoy and I can. However, its not my gun of choice for self-defense because as a woman its not as convenient as say my .357 magnum revolver that is easier to handle and doesn't take up that much room and it's right there. The AR-15 is too heavy for me unless in a tripod and even then it was okay, not my first choice.

The majority of people I know don't own the "assault" rifles necessarily for self protection, but rather because they are gun collectors who are making an investment. Trust me, guns can are a good investment. Same as ammo, gold, silver, etc. My opinion anyway.



posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   
It may be time for me to make some suggestions as to list the must have weapons...

Of the Pistol class I would need a CCW type and a practice .22cal along with home searching type.

Make sure they fit your natural point of aim grip in all types.

The rifle class and caliber is more difficult to fit the shooter to the weapon because it is by nature a long range weapon.

The all around weapon I would pick would be the AR-10 because it is light accurate and has a mild recoil.

You can hunt two legged as well as four legged with the gun and it is very durable in the field.

Love shotguns that are able to be used for around the home because of the superior knock down power at close range.

The home defender class with an 8 round magazine would be able to scare the pants off some would be bad guys.

Pump action is safer to operate then a semi-auto type.

Good hunting!



posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Yurimaster
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Help me understand why the sheeple like yourself buy in the the msm of the word assault weapons. Civilian ar15 are mordern sporting rifles for hunting, recreation and home defense. Assault weapons are15 (M4) with 14 inch barrel fully automatic full mill spec. At least law abiding citizens should have a rifle that can fire more than one shot. Why the police state can have all the firepower? Why the criminals can have a stolen fully auto assault rifle but you cant have one for protection? Dont let history repear it's self.



I'm sorry but as a former U.S. Marine, I don't understand WTF YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY.

Explain to me why any modern sporting rifle would have semi-automatic capabilities....I think that really defeats the purpose of sport...

Semi-automatic, selective firing, and full auto are preferred by military and police forces all over the world...They allow one to acquire(and eliminate if need be) multiple targets quickly...

I've been in multiple combat zones and multiple firefights...some that lasted longer than I thought they ever would...but not once did I think that fully automatic would be the best choice...2 in the chest, 1 in the head...not, 30 around and none on target...(because that's generally what fully automatic shooters do...)So naturally semi-automatic was preferred....and it worked...well

So unless you're hunting a pack of rabid deer...(or are a really wretched shot) then you really don't need semi-automatic capabilities.......

Granted, I understand the debate. As you should expect, I am against any form of gun control...I am however convinced that both sides have bones to pick...which shouldn't be the case when it comes to circumstances such as these...

The people have rights...and they have them for a reason...
However, these rights should be logically applied...not abused "because I can"...

It's also important to note how very simple it is to convert an AR15 to full auto...There are even a few places that sell conversion kits LEGALLY...(they are uncompleted parts that you have to bend, and since they are not selling COMPLETED PARTS, it's considered legal)

Again, I am against gun control and don't really have a dog in this fight....but what you're spewing is utter nonsense.

If you're hunting for sport, there are significantly better choices than an AR15...

Think of the characteristics of the AR15 and then consider this...
Hunting rifles are generally intended for carrying a lot and shooting a little....
Tactical rifles are made for shooting a lot and carrying for only as far as necessary...

(Sure, they would work as hunting rifles with the right configuration, no problem...but they can just as easily be full auto as well)

A2D

edit on 24-6-2014 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-6-2014 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2014 @ 12:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree

originally posted by: Yurimaster
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Help me understand why the sheeple like yourself buy in the the msm of the word assault weapons. Civilian ar15 are mordern sporting rifles for hunting, recreation and home defense. Assault weapons are15 (M4) with 14 inch barrel fully automatic full mill spec. At least law abiding citizens should have a rifle that can fire more than one shot. Why the police state can have all the firepower? Why the criminals can have a stolen fully auto assault rifle but you cant have one for protection? Dont let history repear it's self.



I'm sorry but as a former U.S. Marine, I don't understand WTF YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY.

Explain to me why any modern sporting rifle would have semi-automatic capabilities....I think that really defeats the purpose of sport...

Semi-automatic, selective firing, and full auto are preferred by military and police forces all over the world...They allow one to acquire(and eliminate if need be) multiple targets quickly...

I've been in multiple combat zones and multiple firefights...some that lasted longer than I thought they ever would...but not once did I think that fully automatic would be the best choice...2 in the chest, 1 in the head...not, 30 around and none on target...(because that's generally what fully automatic shooters do...)So naturally semi-automatic was preferred....and it worked...well

So unless you're hunting a pack of rabid deer...(or are a really wretched shot) then you really don't need semi-automatic capabilities.......

Granted, I understand the debate. As you should expect, I am against any form of gun control...I am however convinced that both sides have bones to pick...which shouldn't be the case when it comes to circumstances such as these...

The people have rights...and they have them for a reason...
However, these rights should be logically applied...not abused "because I can"...

It's also important to note how very simple it is to convert an AR15 to full auto...There are even a few places that sell conversion kits LEGALLY...(they are uncompleted parts that you have to bend, and since they are not selling COMPLETED PARTS, it's considered legal)

Again, I am against gun control and don't really have a dog in this fight....but what you're spewing is utter nonsense.

If you're hunting for sport, there are significantly better choices than an AR15...

Think of the characteristics of the AR15 and then consider this...
Hunting rifles are generally intended for carrying a lot and shooting a little....
Tactical rifles are made for shooting a lot and carrying for only as far as necessary...

(Sure, they would work as hunting rifles with the right configuration, no problem...but they can just as easily be full auto as well)

A2D




Are you serious?Do you really understand semi-auto vs auto?So,what should we use?Revolver rifles?The 2nd Amendment was never about deer hunting,do you realize that?Every hunting rifle I have is semi auto,from Browning BAR to Rem 750 in various calibers.

What are you trying to say?



posted on Jun, 25 2014 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Sunwolf

Read my post again. I think you clearly missed my point.

I'm not talking about 2nd amendment rights...I'm not talking about semi-auto vs full auto...I'm not talking about anything other than....

the functionality of semi-automatic HUNTING weapons. Again...If you're hunting, there are much better choices than a modern tactical rifle(which is what an AR15 is)...That's all...

A2D
edit on 25-6-2014 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   
OK, I'll give you a reason for the general public to have equal weapons as our modern military...

What if the so called enemies domestic were to infiltrate and gain control of the highest offices of power with-in the political as well as military establishment?

That is the primary reason the founders gave us the article two in the bill of rights.

Do we not now have questions as to the legal standing of the president regarding his place of birth?

If, just IF the facts show that Obama was and is not now a natural born citizen of the USA, that would constitute fraud on the highest level and could lead to civil unrest at best.

To protect his self from being thrown out of office he might use the commander of chief status to call out the military and declare martial law.

Not a pretty picture?

Is my assertion far fetch, or could there be a time in our future that this could really happen?

Our founders knew it was possible, so they gave us "the people" a way to save us from our selves with underwriting the US constitution with a Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Listen to the video report about Obama's birth certificate:

www.youtube.com...

Hollywood could not even make this up!

What will a rat do when it is cornered?
Martial law is what it would do...



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 15  16  17    19 >>

log in

join