I’m a military man and I think we should ban assault weapons

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Willtell

I've been active duty military for 17 years and I categorically disagree with all of his opinions on this topic.

I'm not going to bash the guy, because looking through his previous pieces I agree with him on some things.

But, this guy is just another random ***hole on the internet. And his opinion should be taken as such.

But more importantly, the Supreme Court disagrees with his opinion too.

Hey, its all opinion right, nobody’s God here, were all entitled to an opinion, your's is as good as his maybe not as wise and logical but as good

originally posted by: Willtell
..Cause whatever big bad gun you think you have the government has one much bigger and badder!

How'd that work out for those commie rice paddy farmers in the Nam? I seem to remember reading we really didn't do the whole total war thing on them which, if we can't even whack a bunch of underequipped individuals residing 10,000 miles away, the government certainly hasn't got the fortitude to do it here.

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: Willtell

Anyway, it’s a legitimate issue of importance to the society


I hope you, my good friend, do not believe a small group of malcontents with AR 15 can stop any government antics.

Well, I hope it never comes to that but should it, I don't believe "malcontents" would be the right word in face of "antics." That's not internally consistent.

The odds are irrelevant, the sentiment not.

Sentiment to mass suicide ala Masada or the Cathars

The only true victory or defense coming in our future is with the mind, spirit or soul not a mechanical killing utensil

imho

originally posted by: Willtell
If anyone is afraid of the government, therefore, we should have access to automatic firearms, or maybe drug dealers you are frightened of or whatever, we have to understand these weapons will never save you from a government gone crazy, all those guns will do is get you dead quickly and violently.

..Cause whatever big bad gun you think you have the government has one much bigger and badder!


You sacrifice those guns you are attached to because you are a good citizen who cares for the victims of a society gone mad.

Its called sacrifice...


From a Christian civilization, you should understand this principle.

Society "going mad" and lawlessness is precisely why I own firearms. I personally am not afraid of a lawful government, I am afraid of a WROL situation.

if we get rid of all sharp objects no one can ever hurt anyone ever again

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: Willtell

Anyway, it’s a legitimate issue of importance to the society


I hope you, my good friend, do not believe a small group of malcontents with AR 15 can stop any government antics.

Well, I hope it never comes to that but should it, I don't believe "malcontents" would be the right word in face of "antics." That's not internally consistent.

The odds are irrelevant, the sentiment not.

Sentiment to mass suicide ala Masada or the Cathars

The only true victory or defense coming in our future is with the mind, spirit or soul not a mechanical killing utensil

imho

Actually, a good point. One the other hand, one needs to survive the vagaries of life until that 'true victory' is achieved. Weapons have their place in the order of things.

originally posted by: infolurker
I personally am not afraid of a lawful government...

Let me know when you spot this unicorn.

Am I the only one who has shut off the msm entirely?

They are psychological terrorists.

Can't figure out if it's just the far left thinking they are punishing the evil right wing gun people, or an attempt to start a civil war.

Neither deserve our attention, or increase my quality of life.

a reply to: Willtell

He's a retired officer, so there's your sign.

But seriously, this retired officer and gun enthusiasts obviously knows little-to-nothing about SCOTUS rulings and the constitutionality of owning said firearms.

Furthermore, and civilian AR-15 is no more a military weapon than numbers 17-20 on list of "versatile semi-automatic hunting rifles." (1-16 are the AR platform...and they're on a list of hunting rifles, which kind of negates the ignorant claim that they don't make good hunting rifles or that they just destroy the meat [which they don't]) Just because the AR platform can be outfitted with military-style furniture doesn't mean that it's a military weapon. It's a semi-automatic rifle that just looks different from, but functions the same as, other semi-automatic rifles.

And his claim that AR-15s are lousy for target shooting is ridiculous--they're fun as hell and considering that I didn't miss any of my 300-yard pop-up targets at age 19 with iron sights, I would argue that they're pretty good at it.

Yes, the Florida shooter could have done what he did with sport rifles (like I've already linked to), with a shotgun (pump actions are easy to reload, and some shotguns are even magazine-fed), and he even could have done more damage with handguns, as demonstrated at the Virginia Tech shooting.

Again, this retired officer is not being truthful, and there are plenty--PLENTY--of videos showing that my claims are the case.

As for the Vegas shooter, again, he could have done such damage with sport rifles, for sure. His wasn't an instance of magazine size as much as it was the amount of firearms that he had, which negates any unverifiable claim that only the AR platform allowed him as much damage to human life as it did.

Then he wants to question what we believe the Founding Fathers intended in the 2nd Amendment--well, sh*t, we have their writings and quotes about it, and they sure as hell didn't intend it to be quickly discarded because a statistically miniscule bunch in the population would use firearms with ill intent. These people were alive when dueling with pistols was still a thing, for Christ's sake.

This guy repeatedly talks about morals and "judgment day," and that's the crux of the problem, here. He pretends that he is being logical and constitutionally based, but in reality, this is just another op-ed that gets major things wrong in their call to make a gun illegal, all based on subjective morals that are assumed to be shared by everyone.

I read this in the spirit of finding wisdom, but there is none to be found, unless opinions based on incorrect conclusions counts.

The funniest thing is that he talks about morals, then tells people to go shoot at other people for money.

ETA:

originally posted by: Willtell

This writer, I usually don’t like at all, but here I can’t see any flaws in his thinking and he deals with all the anti anti gun control issues succinctly.

Jesus, man, did you read the article?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Willtell
..Cause whatever big bad gun you think you have the government has one much bigger and badder!

How'd that work out for those commie rice paddy farmers in the Nam? I seem to remember reading we really didn't do the whole total war thing on them which, if we can't even whack a bunch of underequipped individuals residing 10,000 miles away, the government certainly hasn't got the fortitude to do it here.

Oh my goodness. No, we could have beaten them...

I think your underestimating the NVA and the fact that they were well armed with a national army, and modern massive killing machines from China and Russia. That's who beat the US

IF the US only had to fight the Vietcong then they might have fared better.

The NVA military machine was no militia nor the Vietcong

originally posted by: Willtell
Oh my goodness. No, we could have beaten them..

But we didn't which proves my point.

Wonder how much they paid to get him to write that up...or if he even actually wrote it. Doesn't sound like a single "military man" I know. They all seem to understand that our right to arms is not for hunting or target shooting, but for protection. Protection from criminals, foreign invaders, and from our government alike. While there aren't many uses for automatic firearms aside for suppression I do not want to find myself in the situation where I am using a bolt action single shot or 5 round mag rifle while my opposition has 20-100rnd mags. That is precisely why we need such a thing.

If in general we were more armed in more cases violence would be reduced in cases where the offender wanted to stay alive as they wouldn't have such open opportunities they knew they could use their arms without having arms used on them. The situations where the lunatic doesn't care there is at least more of a chance he can be stopped sooner. I like good odds I tend not to like to gamble bad odds with things I can't afford to lose...like my life.

If yall are taking about Vietnam.

Don't leave out them pesky Russians.

That were giving the Viet Cong.

MACHINE GUNS!

Not what pass's for a firearm these days.

Then don't leave out arming drug cartels, and them 'freedom fighters' over in the ME.

Not really a great spokesman at any rate.

Going to fight in an illegal war only to come home and be denied his right after killing others in the name of.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: infolurker
I personally am not afraid of a lawful government...

Let me know when you spot this unicorn.

Hey now, I have a online citizen score to protect here

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: Willtell

Anyway, it’s a legitimate issue of importance to the society


I hope you, my good friend, do not believe a small group of malcontents with AR 15 can stop any government antics.

Well, I hope it never comes to that but should it, I don't believe "malcontents" would be the right word in face of "antics." That's not internally consistent.

The odds are irrelevant, the sentiment not.

Sentiment to mass suicide ala Masada or the Cathars

The only true victory or defense coming in our future is with the mind, spirit or soul not a mechanical killing utensil

imho

Actually, a good point. One the other hand, one needs to survive the vagaries of life until that 'true victory' is achieved. Weapons have their place in the order of things.

Not when your society has broken down and is misusing them.

The fact of the matter is as folks here talk about emotionalism, it is thou who art emotionally tied to automatic weapons, that have little utility in a civilized society.

Ill venture that not one of you can honestly say your big bad gun saved you or anyone else’s life.

But the massive and legal abuse of a country wide arsenal of weaponry just may be adding to the social disease that is rampant and tearing apart the life and bodies of children

Yet you selfishly cling to your beloved guns


Let God be your judge

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: Willtell

Anyway, it’s a legitimate issue of importance to the society


I hope you, my good friend, do not believe a small group of malcontents with AR 15 can stop any government antics.

Well, I hope it never comes to that but should it, I don't believe "malcontents" would be the right word in face of "antics." That's not internally consistent.

The odds are irrelevant, the sentiment not.

Sentiment to mass suicide ala Masada or the Cathars

The only true victory or defense coming in our future is with the mind, spirit or soul not a mechanical killing utensil

imho

Actually, a good point. One the other hand, one needs to survive the vagaries of life until that 'true victory' is achieved. Weapons have their place in the order of things.

Not when your society has broken down and is misusing them.

The fact of the matter is as folks here talk about emotionalism, it is thou who art emotionally tied to automatic weapons, that have little utility in a civilized society.

Ill venture that not one of you can honestly say your big bad gun saved you or anyone else’s life.

But the massive and legal abuse of a country wide arsenal of weaponry just may be adding to the social disease that is rampant and tearing apart the life and bodies of children

Yet you selfishly cling to your beloved guns


Let God be your judge

We selfishly cling to OUR beloved guns because they are not harming anyone. We are also under no delusion that if firearms were magically banned tomorrow that criminals, gangs, home invaders, mass shooters, and psychopaths will have no problem having them (and we won't). As I mentioned before, how did Prohibition and the War on Drugs work out......


We are not going to willingly make ourselves and our families sheep to the wolves.

a reply to: Willtell

It's very telling that you skipped past my question Willtell. You should have called yourself Won'ttell...

a reply to: Willtell

I understand the sentiment, but..........there's several problems I see with this going forward. Ban the sale of automatic rifles, (long arms) going forward? You still have millions in circulation. Want to do a gun grab on these weapons? 1) there's no registry telling who owns what and 2) you'd get about 10~15% compliance. And there would immediately spring up a black market in those type weapons.

I don't have any answers except to truly beef up the background checks, close the loopholes, set up a mental health system to identify and sequester the nuts from general population and harden the schools such that people can't just randomly enter the schools and wander about.

But really? What I've figured out is that the Democrats who've politicized this issue since this most recent shooting never address the "harden the schools" issue because, in truth, they don't care about the kids or their safety, they only care about abridging freedoms, confiscating the firearms and effectively repealing the 2nd Amendment, rendering everyone into helpless victims.

And that is a bridge too far for at least 40% of the population and you'll not be taking us there.

originally posted by: Willtell
Not when your society has broken down and is misusing them.

Only a miniscule few in our society of more than 320-million people misuse them. That's not exactly a broad-sweeping problem.

Statistics matter when trying to paint an issue as broken-down-society problem.

The fact of the matter is as folks here talk about emotionalism, it is thou who art emotionally tied to automatic weapons, that have little utility in a civilized society.

What automatic weapons? We're talking about AR-15s.

Ill venture that not one of you can honestly say your big bad gun saved you or anyone else’s life.

Not the point of the 2nd Amendment at all, but a cute little talking point, I suppose.

But the massive and legal abuse of a country wide arsenal of weaponry just may be adding to the social disease that is rampant and tearing apart the life and bodies of children

Sh*t, man, hyperbole and appeal to emotion much?

Again, statistics matter. Look up the probability of being a victim of a school or mass shooting and get back to us on that.

Yet you selfishly cling to your beloved guns

You selfishly cling to your ideal that you should be able to tell us that we can't have them, and you incorrectly identify what we "selfishly" cling to, which is an enshrined right that shall not be infringed.

But yes, let's let whiney emotional people led by fear dictate what should and should not be a right--that always works out well for the majority of people. It was asinine when used to support slavery, it was asinine when used to keep women from voting, it was asinine when used to support separate-but-equal legislation, it was asinine when used to demonize alcohol and drugs, and it's asinine now to use the same tactic to demonize a gun (and the segment of society who appreciates them and argues to keep that right in tact).

a reply to: Mandroid7

You're right...we should all pop some popcorn and watch "Flight of the Navigator."

Nice avatar GIF (I feel like I've told you that already).