Biden to Doomsday Preppers: Shotguns Are Better than AR-15s in Earthquakes, page 1

“So what would you say to the people who say, yes, you are infringing on our rights, not for sporting or for hunting, but in California, everyone talks about the big earthquake or some terrible natural disaster as a last line of defense,” DeFranco wondered. “What would you say to those people?”

“A shotgun will keep you a lot safer — a double-barreled shotgun — than the assault weapons in somebody’s hands that doesn’t know how to use it, even one that does know how to use it,” Biden advised. “You know, it’s hard to use an assault weapon and hit something than it is a shotgun.”

“If you want to keep people away in an earthquake, buy some shotgun shells,” he added. “I’m must less concerned quite frankly about what you would call an assault weapon than I am about magazines and the number of rounds that can be held in a magazine.”

After watching this video I am beginning to see a pattern in the rationalization being fed to the public. Biden says, "I know of no sport that needs a 100 round clip" Which is basically true. (paraphrasing>)"An untrained person can defend themselves better with a double barreled shotgun than an assault rifle", which is also basically true. He also says,(again paraphrasing>) "It is the LEOs that suffer because they are out gunned", which is also true. I see a bunch of truths being put out for reasons for pushing this ban, yet the true purpose of the 2nd Amendment is totally being ignored in any and all of the banning reasons. They are not addressing the fact that by removing these weapons they make it easier to continue their tyrannical behavior as perceived by many in todays day and age. Of course they do not want the LEOs to be out gunned and that is an issue that truly needs to be looked at for sure, but in banning the publics defense against a tyrannical Government and letting them keep their short range weapons and sling shots(which are also illegal in some places) they are attempting to ensure an uprising of the people leading to the collapse of said tyranny is a non-existent possibility.

I know the gun issue has been over killed as of late but it is an ongoing issue for the U.S. at this point. It appears they are attempting to circumvent the 2nd Amendment by limiting what it is we can own and ensuring their superiority over the people and their right to overthrow tyranny.

Thoughts?

reply to post by Miraj

---

Thank you, I meant to add that to my OP and forgot. Limiting us to short range weapons so they can stand just out of our range and pick us off. LOL riiiiiiiight Mr. V.P.

reply to post by Agarta

---

This guy is a gaff a minute. This disgusting, misguided attack against the 2nd amendment would be better served if Biden had his mouth taped shut. I'm glad he's still allowed to talk because he's not doing them any favors!

So a 2 round shotgun would be a more effective defensive weapon? The average home invasion has 3 bad guys. What does he recommend in that instance; the first 2 guys get shot and the 3rd guy gets a beating?

Liberals always want people “out of your bedroom” but they sure are quick to stick their nose in your gun safe or nightstand.

reply to post by Agarta

---

Of course they do not want the LEOs to be out gunned and that is an issue that truly needs to be looked at for sure, but in banning the publics defense against a tyrannical Government and letting them keep their short range weapons and sling shots(which are also illegal in some places) they are attempting to ensure an uprising of the people leading to the collapse of said tyranny is a non-existent possibility.

As far as the LEO's being out gunned, it's not so much the general public that they need to be afraid of but of the gang bangers.....they have serious fire power and they abide by no laws. But as usual, they'll overlook them like they don't exist and focus on the law abiding citizens.

ETA: Biden is such a goof ball IMO.....

reply to post by Agarta

---

“You know, it’s hard to use an assault weapon and hit something than it is a shotgun.”

if it is that difficult for the experienced and the non experienced alike to to shoot and actually hit something with an "assult weapon" then why are they so interested in getting rid of them again?

Wasn't it because of how "dangerous" they are and because of all of the people who WERE shooting and hitting their targets with them?

Ol Uncle Joe is off his meds again and isn't making sense nor being consistant.
Either they ARE extremely effective and are outright KILLING MACHINES or they aren't good for jack squat because it is impossible to hit your target with one.

btw Uncle Joe, if shotguns are so formidable then why aren't we looking to outlaw them as well?
Hmmm.

also, I seem to have to problem hitting my target with an "assault Rifle".
I will refrain from mentioning the photo that I shoot at but, I hit it every time.

reply to post by snarky412

---

Excellent point! These laws don't effect the gang bangers who are the real threat to LE.

The entire premise is ridiculous. The best argument FOR high capacity magazines I’ve seen lately is out of Georgia. This young mother of two shot an intruder in her home with a 38 revolver. She emptied the entire gun on the man (6 rounds) striking him 5 times in the face and neck. The man stood up, walked to his car and drove away (he was apprehended shortly afterwards).

Point being – had he been armed he could have easily killed this woman and her children. Imagine if she only had 2 rounds as Biden suggests! What a moron!

reply to post by seabag

---

Point being – had he been armed he could have easily killed this woman and her children. Imagine if she only had 2 rounds as Biden suggests! What a moron!

Also, what if there is more than one intruder, say 2 or 3??
And factor in fear, adrenalin and whether or not a person is a good shooter. Will they be able to hit a moving target in 1 shot? What about 2 or 3 moving targets???

And from what I've been told, it's easier to reload and put another magazine in rather than to reload a 6 shooter under extreme circumstances, especially if one's hand is shaking like a leaf...

I'm thinking of getting a gun but not sure what kind. I do know I want one with a mag that at least holds 10 if not 14 rounds. Being a lady, the guns being smaller would probably hold 10, not for sure tho.
I've been hinting to my hubby about one for my birthday.
We'll see....

reply to post by snarky412

---

I'm thinking of getting a gun but not sure what kind. I do know I want one with a mag that at least holds 10 if not 14 rounds.

UH….you’d better hurry up if you want more than a 10 round mag!

You’ll still be able to get them but they will set you back $$$$$$$

Being a lady, the guns being smaller would probably hold 10, not for sure tho.

You’re right; smaller usually hold 10 or less. There are several threads in the survival forum on ATS that get into the types and applications. I’m sure your hubby has an idea of what would suit your needs.

AND I bet your husband won’t suggest a DOUBLE BARREL SHOTGUN!

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Agarta

---

This guy is a gaff a minute. This disgusting, misguided attack against the 2nd amendment would be better served if Biden had his mouth taped shut. I'm glad he's still allowed to talk because he's not doing them any favors!

So a 2 round shotgun would be a more effective defensive weapon? The average home invasion has 3 bad guys. What does he recommend in that instance; the first 2 guys get shot and the 3rd guy gets a beating?

Liberals always want people “out of your bedroom” but they sure are quick to stick their nose in your gun safe or nightstand.

Just like how conservatives claim to support smaller government, but yet want to force women to give birth even in cases of rape?

Please stop calling the kettle black, Mr. Pot

reply to post by muse7

---

Just how conservatives claim to support smaller government, but yet want to force women to giver birth even in cases of rape?

Please stop calling the kettle black, Mr. Pot

I don't support that BUT.....start a new thread…I don’t want to derail the OP’s thread here.

I’ll gladly smack you around on that topic, good buddy!

reply to post by muse7
reply to post by seabag

---

I saw this one go by this morning. Interesting situation and debate. New Mexico Bill Would Criminalize Abortions After Rape

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by muse7

---

Just how conservatives claim to support smaller government, but yet want to force women to giver birth even in cases of rape?

Please stop calling the kettle black, Mr. Pot

I don't support that BUT.....start a new thread…I don’t want to derail the OP’s thread here.

I’ll gladly smack you around on that topic, good buddy!

Internet tough guy eh? "Smack me around"? Please buddy.

Is this why you love your guns so much? To feel a fake feeling of superiority? Lol

I'm over here if you want the smack, sir.

Just a little friendly banter...don't get your knickers in a pinch.

Norway To Open Century Old Package
  Posted 19 days ago with 127 member flags

World\'s richest woman calls for Australian workers to be paid $2 a day to compete with Africans
  Posted 6 days ago with 69 member flags

Blame The Real Bad Guys - The Powers Behind Super Powers
  Posted 18 days ago with 65 member flags

19 Yr Old Hostage Gunned Down By Police While Escaping Captor
  Posted 8 days ago with 53 member flags

DHS Source: “It’s going hot”
  Posted 14 days ago with 49 member flags

Police Shoot Another 911 Caller In Her Own Backyard
  Posted 19 days ago with 46 member flags

50,000 people have 90 mins evacuate , Percy Quinn Dam expected to break
  Posted 12 days ago with 46 member flags

The Oatmeal\'s Tesla Fundraiser Pushes Past $1.1M
  Posted 15 days ago with 44 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: