It's the Guns

a reply to: Fallingdown

I remember shooting an M60 with tracers at the range in Benning, and it was AWESOME!!
And thats where it belongs...on the range.

a reply to: ErEhWoN

I blame anyone who perpetuates the narrative, whether for or against. And yes, that will include republicans.

But there are degrees there. They may be complicit, but what they are doing isnt nearly as likely to kneecap my nation.

Im not on the "right," FWIW.

a reply to: ErEhWoN

Don't think m16 or ak belong in the hands of civilians. Or body armor....who needs body armor to hunt, unless your with Dick Cheny.

That's your opinion and you have a right to it. However, the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting. So, if someone wants body armor, they should have a right to it.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: Bhadhidar

We don’t have to ban them, just have to stop making them (for everyone except law enforcement and the military).

Why exempt military and law enforcement?

Because members of law enforcement and the military are called upon to kill people far more often than members of the general public?

And, in the case of the military, that call frequently requires many people to be killed as quickly as possible?

originally posted by: ErEhWoN

Or maybe it's because you don't have to worry about coyotes/wolves attacking the livestock you depend on to survive, both financially and as means to feed your family.

a reply to: seaswine

So, how was this done before AR15??

And how many of those coyotes/wolves were shooting back? I got off the bus one day in Chicago when I was in my 20's and the bullets were flyin!

Sheltered? Ha, wish it was coyotes and wolves, they dont shoot at you!

It was done mostly with bolt/lever action rifles. If you're good with a lever action, you can shoot close to as fast as a semi auto.

I've seen both sides of the coin. From Trenton NJ to a small ranch in rural PA. If you have people shooting at you, you either shot first or did something stupid/are in a rival gang.

Eventually people like the OP and other like-minded individuals will get their wish.

It’s how the country is progressing. Freedoms are constantly being eroded and a growing number of people are applauding it.

It’s ironic that they call Trump a tyrant when their policy positions endorse and encourage tyranny.

In all honesty, the only discussion should be about WHY young men go apeship nuts and decide to kill strangers for no apparent reason.

Focus on the individual perpetrator---not his weapon of choice, be it gun, automobile, truck, machete, knife, bomb, etc.

There are 535 people in Congress, one president and one cabinet, and nine Supreme Court justices. Should these +/- 600 people have any right whatsoever to infringe on The American People's unalienable right to keep and bear arms? No.

There are about 350,000,000 of us. We are not subjects of the government and certainly not of those 600 plus or minus people. We are citizens and our 2A shall not be infringed, not even by those 600 people. They do not have the right regardless of what they think.

originally posted by: Bhadhidar

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: Bhadhidar

We don’t have to ban them, just have to stop making them (for everyone except law enforcement and the military).

Why exempt military and law enforcement?

Because members of law enforcement and the military are called upon to kill people far more often than members of the general public?

And, in the case of the military, that call frequently requires many people to be killed as quickly as possible?

Neither law enforcement or the military is called upon to kill anyone. Law enforcement are called upon to investigate crimes, make arrests, write tickets, etc. The military is called upon to make opposing forces surrender. The only ones I can think of offhand who are frequently called upon to kill people are executioners and, in some cases, doctors.

a reply to: ErEhWoN

First of all you’re not talking to someone that breathes cordite all day. I’m flexible and because I’ve seen what red flag laws can do I’m OK with them. Temporary gun confiscation as a cooling off period makes sense it’s saved many women’s lives and has been in practice in the United States since 1999 .

Confiscating peoples weapons is just feel good measure by the liberals aka control freaks.

Read my first paragraph again. Do you see that reasonable thinking up there with a little give-and-take?

Where is yours ?

And all that’s besides the point because the left is full of racist , white supremacist and back to the southern Democrats KKK. Their colors are finally starting to show . (Jk)

a reply to: ErEhWoN

Common sense is eluded by this post.

Other countries still have crime. They still have muders. Yet they don't have guns? So what is it their subjects are murdered with?

A firearm is just a tool. A knife is just a tool. A firearm can serve as a tool for good like gathering food or self-defense.. And so on.

A knife, spreads tasty peanut butter...or when used right? Gets one a firearm to be used for good.

It is a moral heart condition not the fault of the tool.

"Governments" around the world have banned this or that "for your safety ". You're still not safe.

Your "tyrannical government" comment is not logical and is void of "common sense" and is without historical context. Every government that exists, was and is in existence, by the "raise of arms".

Plus? The word you're looking for in definition for The U.S.A is Republic.
Democracy is a "majority" rule thing. Much like polling data, "majority".
The cool thing about the U.S.? Is the majority doesn't get to dictate our rights. The law of our Republic established our rights outside the feelings or thought, of the "majority". We are not a democracy, We are a Republic! If you can not understand this/that? You probably can't understand why "arms" are a useful tool against "tyrannical government" either.

OP I have no doubt you live. But there is no doubt you haven't lived... I could be wrong, maybe. But for sure, you learned nothing by just being there.

To state it in the most simple terms... the United States ranking on the International homicide rankings, is around 110th.

Many nations with EXTREMELY restrictive laws or outright gun bans, have more murders than the U.S.

Preventable medical errors are the number 3 cause of death in America. Homicide, generally, isn't even in the top 15, and homicides with firearms would be even lower yet.

Basically... this is all a political ruse.

Common sense would be that if the government feared an armed people, then it has tyranny in mind. You will never prove me wrong. I have history on my side.

a reply to: DBCowboy

It'll dawn on them, when they're being loaded on a "mandatory" train, that'll be taking them to a "safe space". I'm sure the "work" there, "will set them free".

Other countries dont have an MKULTRA/ DARPA program. Also...most mass killings in other countries use weapons like...vehicles...bombs...knoves...poison gas... But i digress.a reply to: ErEhWoN

a reply to: Arizonaguy

Well, I’ll tell you. It is because they already played with the First Amendment, (and in the words of Trump) bigly.

Once upon a time one of the parts was all about Freedom of Religion, but someone decided it needed to be Freedom from Religion. And that is where problems began in earnest. “Separation of Church and State” doesn’t appear anywhere in the Constitution, and while Congress had no power to establish an official Religion, the States were able to do so and 12 of the original 13 did.

But then came 1947 and a lovely court case came before the Supreme Court, Everson v. Board of Education. The Supreme incorporated the establishment clause, determining that it applied to the states and that a law enabling reimbursement for busing to all schools (including parochial schools) was legal. But that there needed to be a stronger division between all government and church. That later came to a head with 1962’s Engel v. Vitale which effectively ended prayer in school that was written by school officials. Especially when Madalyn O'Hair made a career out of ending all prayer in schools. But even in the early 1970’s, report cards still had “citizenship” as a subjective grade. Not so much anymore.

So morals and ethics are gone as too religious and the subjective grades of “plays well with others and isn’t a brooding sociopath” are all but gone. Is it any wonder that pent up frustrations are a popped cork reaction in hail of bullets? Especially when any talk remotely based on the Ten Commandments is grounds for being fired with prejudice. Even if it is a very generic recognize that there is an authority, that should be respected humbly and can punish you as needed. Don’t lie, cheat, steal or kill. Be happy with what you have instead of jealous of the success of others.

Much better situation to have children mow down other children than to teach that. And since we were so successful, let’s go down the list to those guns. Alexa has the 3rd covered...

originally posted by: murphy22
a reply to: DBCowboy

It'll dawn on them, when they're being loaded on a "mandatory" train, that'll be taking them to a "safe space". I'm sure the "work" there, "will set them free".

I don't know. It takes a certain moral and ethical strength to keep freedoms and liberties, to understand the concept of freedoms and liberties.

I don't see much of that any more.

a reply to: Ahabstar

Beside academics, children back then were graded on "Habits and Attitudes". Here is an actual list of them:

CITIZENSHIP HABITS:
Disciplines himself
Responds promptly and willingly
Is courteous
Works and plays well with others
Respects property rights
Shows initiative

WORK HABITS:
Is self-reliant
Is attentive
Uses time and materials effectively
Follows directions intelligently
Participates in class activities
Is accurate
Does neat and orderly work
Is industrious

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
Are we banning cars next since it's also a tool that when operated incorrectly or illegally kills millions a year?

I'm tired of this silly argument.

Were cars "designed" to kill? No.

Guns were.

originally posted by: ErEhWoN
a reply to: shooterbrody
Yep, well-regulated...

Got it

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

Got it?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
It’s a Constutional Right.

Not to mince words, but it is a natural right that is recognized by Amendment to the Constitution as inalienable/unalienable.

It's also apt to be the cause of Revolution. If the right person ever 'takes power' in this country, that 'right person' will skin everyone who has ever violated their Oath by allowing the 2d to be Infringed.