NYT: Americans With Assault Rifles Should 'Give Them Up For The Good Of Their Fellow Citizens'

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

And as a (often stated) "law abiding citizen" you'd just hand them right over? Amarite?

BUT, and this is a big one.

Since when does the LAW matter ?

Illegals don't have to follow the law. Gun owners don't have to either.

And it is that simple.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

And as a (often stated) "law abiding citizen" you'd just hand them right over? Amarite?

BUT, and this is a big one.

Since when does the LAW matter ?

Illegals don't have to follow the law. Gun owners don't have to either.

And it is that simple.

Ahh refreshingly honest, but oh so delectably hypocritical!!!

You've made my evening.

This is the NYT changing to try to put a hold on the freefall they have been in for a while.....

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Oh yeah it is hypocritical, but not in the way you meant.

No one is suppose to be above the law.

One group is. The other one isn't.

There is no point in laws if people have the 'freedom' to pick and choose which ones to follow.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: RoadCourse

A raving lunatic who cries about their guns being taken away when in reality, ie away from LaLaLand where the raving lunatic resides, their guns will never be taken away.

Because, we will fight to keep them, or they would be gone long ago.

Or didn't you notice the hundreds of times they have tried?

The bits tried as well, how did that work out.

We aren't giving them up, we will not tolerate any further infringement of our uninfringable right to them, period.

It is not about compromise, we have already compromised many times, it is never enough.

Only full disarmament will be enough for the anti gun crowd.

Unlike Obama and squishy political types, when we draw a red line we mean it.

That is what honest folks do, they tell you where the line is, then they enforce it, period.

a reply to: neo96

No, it's hypocritical in the way I meant...

You're one of the most vocal on I.I Laws not being followed...
As soon as it's close to heart you don't have to follow the law...

I get it.
Hypocritical to the max, written out by yourself and quoted for proof...



Tell me Neo, who's gonna take your guns?

China?
Iran?
Obamabots?
Demons at Armageddon?


I did warn these examples can only become more and more implausible & ludicrous.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Afraid not.

a reply to: forkedtongue

I appreciate your first ATS response being to me, but 1) I've heard all that before & 2) will you answer who is going to physically take your guns?

No one else wants to because they know they'll have to implicate the very people they say would never do such a thing?

Armed forces? Not plausible, it's stated often they're on side.
Police? Same as above?
CIA? That I could believe, but then you're talking civil war... Even the CIA don't want that.
Hillary and Biden? 2 60+ year olds, yeah I'm back to ridiculous because I've run out of examples of these fearful "gun grabbers".

The big problem with banning such is that the genie is out of the bottle. It would seem that those who would use such would likely find ways to get existing weapons. Next will come a ban on semi auto rifles that don't look like the evil assault rifle. [I had a discussion on these boards and was told that a military Browning Automatic Rifle was not an assault rifle because it didn't have a pistol grip like the Sturmgewehr44. My experience with the BAR was that it would assault things very nicely but didn't meet the definition.] Where will it end? Will the snackbar terrorists turn in their weapons along with the citizens? Will gang bangers rush to hand over their guns and resort to fists?

It seems reasonable that those on the "no fly" list should not be able to acquire firearms.

Correct me if I am wrong but what other use does an automatic rifle have away from a war zone?... The idea of these things is to kill a lot of people.....so how do you argue that you need one for protection?

a reply to: neo96

Dodging the question then.

That's cool.

I refer you back to my response #1 on Page 1.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: neo96

No, it's hypocritical in the way I meant...

You're one of the most vocal on I.I Laws not being followed...
As soon as it's close to heart you don't have to follow the law...

I get it.
Hypocritical to the max, written out by yourself and quoted for proof...



Tell me Neo, who's gonna take your guns?

China?
Iran?
Obamabots?
Demons at Armageddon?


I did warn these examples can only become more and more implausible & ludicrous.

Well unless they changed the 2nd it would not be a lawful law, so it is lawful not to follow it.

Plenty of gov stooges will do anything they are told, just like many police will.

You are speaking in absolutes, like all police or all soldiers are of the exact same mentality.

They are all individuals just like everyone else, and yes, many would do it.

a reply to: forkedtongue

Refreshing.

You see not many round here will admit that there is an enemy within your own protective forces, and that is the question I was trying to get an answer to.

Thanks FT.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Correct me if I am wrong but what other use does an automatic rifle have away from a war zone?... The idea of these things is to kill a lot of people.....so how do you argue that you need one for protection?

I'm confused who has automatic weapons in the US but the military and Cops? You ever go pig hunting with a M4, its fun and you need it. Lets say they are made to kill a lot of people, how about killing a lot of bad people then? I really do not know what you are getting at, so may I ask what is a nice gun to you?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Guns don't do it for me.....

Like I said correct me if I am wrong.... I assumed the term assault rifle was referring to either semi or automatic rifles...

originally posted by: buster2010
Here is a link to the NYT article.
End the Gun Epidemic in America
They do make a good point though back when the cop killer bullets came out they got rid of them so why not get rid of the favorite weapon of mass killers. If they don't want to get rid of them then modify them to work like a bolt action.

Explain to me what a cop killer bullet is,please.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Correct me if I am wrong but what other use does an automatic rifle have away from a war zone?... The idea of these things is to kill a lot of people.....so how do you argue that you need one for protection?

An AR-15 is not an automatic rifle......

That is the dumbest thing gun grabbers always say.

You obviously know nothing about guns.

Since you know nothing about them, how can you even have anything but a emotional stance on them?

There is no such thing as an assault rifle, an AR-15 is nothing more than a high powered 22 bullet that can shoot just as fast as any semiautomatic 22 even those without a pistol grip or removeable magazine.

An AR-15 just looks scary to people that know nothing about guns.

1 trigger pull, 1 bullet period, just like every other gun including revolvers.

If it were a car, it would be a regular car with go fast stickers on it.

It looks cool, but it is only looks, it doesn't make it go faster.

Now that you have been informed what an AR-15 is I assume your ignorance on the subject has been cured, correct?

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

You see not many round here will admit that there is an enemy within your own protective forces, and that is the question I was trying to get an answer to.

Thanks FT.

I'm not sure what you mean by enemy within your own protective force, please explain. Cops many times are crime investigators after the crime happens, so I'm not sure who will protect me other than myself if needed. I would also say that a billion guns in civilian hands is a calculating factor if we ever went to war with Russia or China and there was an invasion. Who might take my guns...well lets see... The democrats want to vote in "lists" to take guns. Today it is no fly list...bye guns, oh lets make a person watch list bye guns, how about a veteran list you know PTSD and all, bye guns, you know someone with a speeding ticket is just not mature enough to have guns, so bye guns, have an argument with your wife..bye guns...lol

a reply to: forkedtongue

Sigh....before you go around accusing others of being stupid take a good look in the mirror ....you cannot seem to grasp the difference between a question and a statement

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Xtrozero

Guns don't do it for me.....

Like I said correct me if I am wrong.... I assumed the term assault rifle was referring to either semi or automatic rifles...

AR actually stands for ArmaLite rifle, an assault is military use full automatic. Not really a big deal other than anything not with a wood stock is an evil assault rifle. Its like people want to band guns on their looks.