After AR15's are banned, then what?

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by trickyricky, Jun 21, 2016.

  1. PARTIZAN1

    PARTIZAN1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2015
    Messages:
    46,841
    Likes Received:
    18,955
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    How about it is reasonable to consider restricting things such 100 rounds mags and still make sure that we keep our weapons for protection and guns for hunting or target shooting.
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2019
  2. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The point entirely is, gun a holics need to play games and live in fear to fill their unending thirst to hide behind fire arms. They play soldier, cops and robbers and now FBI agents. Amazing.
     
  3. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The same reasoning you gave before to excuse the murder of children as a willing sacrifice to placate the criminal nra. .
     
  4. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh, you’re not ?
     
  5. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You mean give them 100rd magazines with the hope they will leave us alone?
    What on earth makes you think that will happen?
     
  6. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is a difference between living in fear and wishing to be prepared in case a bad situation arrives. I believe the fear is actually on the other side of this debate. From what I'm seeing many folks are afraid of the fact that I have a closet full of AK-47s. What exactly are they afraid of? It's not like the things can get up by themselves and start shooting at people. Nobody seems particularly worried about the truck that I drive. I don't get the fear here.
     
  7. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That’s exactly what normal people are afraid of. Everyone suspects that you can only shoot them one at a time, but they are right in being concerned they will find their way into criminal hands by theft, private sale, a lunatic relative etc. ;
    proliferation of any thing expands its use.
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2019
  8. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It wouldn't and thats the problem. This is actually the reason why many are against any form of gun legislation and it's the part that makes many on the Left think that gun owners are insane.

    The quick explanation is simple, most of us really don't care about the proposals being put up. Do I REALLY care about banning bump stocks? No, I don't have those I think it's stupid. Do I REALLY care about expanding universal background checks? No, ok so I have to wait 20 mins instead of 10 mins now to buy guns even though this won't help anything. Do I REALLY care about 100 round drums? No, I don't even own any of those they are way too cumbersome and pointless in my opinion.

    We don't care about the things you want to ban, we care about you not knowing when to stop banning things. Give an inch, take a mile. Start with 100 round mags, then 30 round mags, then 10 round mags, then say the magazine must be permanently attached to the rifle like CA or NY. Then take the rifles completely, etc.

    Thats why gun owners tend to "kick and scream" every time gun legislation is brought up. It's not like we really care about that stuff, we just don't trust you to sit down and be content if we let you "win" once. Because we all know the Left won't, and they know that too. Start small then work your way up.

    Quit threatening us all the time and we would be more willing to work with you....Hell the top Presidential Candidate for next year went on TV and was asked what his response was to gun owners who believe he would come for our guns if elected President. His response? "YES! If you have an assault rifle because those shouldn't have been legal in the first place, period".

    And I'm supposed to trust that you'll leave me alone if I give you drum mags and bump stocks? Every single Democrat Presidential Candidate flat out said they would work to ban my semi-auto rifles. That's not leaving us alone...

    I actually respect those candidates in this regard. At least they are being honest about it unlike past politicians who beat around the bush and lie about their true intentions and them fuss at us for not working with them.
     
    trickyricky likes this.
  9. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Everything you said is fine, but what I don't understand is WHY people are afraid of my AKs and not of other things? I'm not being facetious here but rather genuinely trying to figure this out. I'm pretty "stoic" in regards to most things (my ex hated me for that) so that might be why I don't get the fear. But I don't see this same level of fear by folks in regards to other things in daily life that are way more likely to result in their serious injury or death that we all routinely do on a daily basis.

    I don't see people being genuinely afraid to drive to work in the morning for fear of crashing and dying. That is something that my neighbors should be way more fearful of than my guns based on pure statistics. I'm not necessarily hating on people for being scared of things, a whole lot of people have phobias that make no actual sense, but when it comes to being seriously injured or killed tomorrow then my AKs and the concerns you've listed rank very far down on the totem pole. There are a multitude of other things than people should be concerned with if serious injury or death is something they are worried about.

    But they aren't, why?

    I wake up every morning and walk into my closet by my rifles and grab clothes, I'm not worried about them. I take a shower, make coffee, get in my truck and I drive to work, I'm not worried about crashing and dying. I went to a festival here a few weeks ago and enjoyed myself, I never once worried about somebody opening up on the place with a rifle. I'm not worried about those things because it makes no literal sense to worry about those things. I am 100x more likely to die driving to the festival than I am of getting shot with an AR15 at the festival. So is everybody else. So what exactly are people freaked out for? Is it serious injury or death? If thats the case then you should never leave your home because pretty much every activity you partake in throughout the day is statistically more likely to result in serious injury or death to you than somebody shooting you with an AK47 that looks like the ones in my closet....Are you more afraid of dying via gunshot than auto accident or something?
     
  10. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Seriously ?

    People can use all sorts of items to kill others. What they are concerned with, is the availability of specialized weapons that do it most effectively. You can start with atomic weapons on the macro scale, but seriously, it’s the people who literally sound like you that are of most concern. You lack empathy.

    I’ve known a lot of other veterans who left the service who used these weapons of war. I personally know NONE who own them in civilian life even though many continued to hunt and have other weapons for self defense.
     
  11. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't lack empathy, I lack the ability to support someone proposing taking away my firearms out of fear. You being afraid of something is not a valid justification for taking it away from me. And to correct your statement, guns do it effectively, not most effectively. Explosives are most effective that's why planes drop bombs instead of doing gun runs.

    I respect your fear and I will do my best to not purposefully scare you or anything. I know a few people who are scared of guns, I have one friend who is oddly TERRIFIED of guns, like terrified to the point of literally run out of the room screaming if she so much as sees a gun. It's a little over the top in my book but whatever, whenever she comes to visit I make sure that none are around for her to see and freak her out. And whenever we go to dinner or something I make sure to leave my concealed Smith & Wesson at home just in case she accidentally sees it somehow and panics or something. I don't mind doing that. But what I will not do is get rid of my guns because she is afraid of them. Her being deathly terrified of firearms (which really is weird) is not a valid justification for me to not own firearms.

    Point is I will do what I can to be respectful to others emotions about things, like if I knew my neighbor was afraid of rifles I wouldn't sit on my balcony with one in my lap and tell him to kiss my ass or anything (he's not he has more guns than I do, everybody has guns here). And if I were going to the range or something I would do my best to make sure he wasn't outside as I loaded my truck up. I had a neighbor like that before and I gave him that respect. However, no I'm not going to just not own guns because my neighbor is scared of them, I'll do my best to keep them out of your sight but I'm not getting rid of them for you or anything.

    I don't know your age or which era of veterans you are talking about but I can tell you with 100% certainty that what you said about veterans isn't true of current era veterans. I know a lot of vets and active duty Soldiers from this current era (kinda my job) and EVERYBODY has AR-15s that look just like the M4's we use in Iraq and it's been that way for nearly 2 decades. Notice how I said LOOK like the M4s. It's actually the main reason why my closet is full of AK-47s, every damn person at the range walks up with AR-15s, I wanted to be different so I got an AK instead. Then I really enjoyed the platform so I purchased more over the years. I do have an AR though but I haven't shot the thing in years.
     
  12. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I answered what I answered. I notice that you won't answer your own question.
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2019
  13. PARTIZAN1

    PARTIZAN1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2015
    Messages:
    46,841
    Likes Received:
    18,955
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I am a gun owner but I have come to believe that the pendulum of too many people who though they have the right under our Constitution to own high rate of fire high and capacity weapon who should not have them. I have people in my own family who never owned a gun before went out and bought an AR15 type platform rifle just because Fox News and the NRA told them that Obama was going to confiscate our guns.
    Obama is gone but I still have not only the weapons I had before Obama but acquired three more rifles granted to me in the will of a relative. Obama did not take them away from my relative and they nor my others some of which I had since my dad gave me my first .22 will be taken away from me.

    We all have the right to bear arms as per the Constitution but not all of us should and if we do we should for the right reasons. People who are buying weapons for political reasons are doing so irrationally. These are the type of people who prone to causing death by accident or going off the deep end like the el Paso shooter.

    Those entities such as the current NRA and Fox News talking heads who spread the fears through lies that guns will be confiscated are encouraging the less than tightly wowned individual to go and do something that brings disgrace upon all us gun owners. The over supply of guns will caused the pendulum to swing against gun ownership. The NRS who claims to be the defender of our fight to bear arms will be the cause of us losing that right some time in the future. Hope that Inam not here anyopmore when that sad day comes.

    It like the right to drive a car in that we can with some restrictions such speed limits and traffic signs.
     
  14. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We don't have an absolute right to drive a car. We do have a right to keep and bear arms. Driving on public roads is a privilege, not a right.

    Rights don't require reasons. I have a right to freedom of speech. I can say pretty much what I want to (besides threatening people). I can do so for whatever reason I want--political, fun, to communicate, to work. etc. I have a right to religious expression. Again, I don't need a reason other than wanting to to use that right. Right's cannot be limited, other than when they directly harm someone else.

    I can own a car and drive it without a license or registration legally, as long as I stay off of public roads.
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2019
  15. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the second amendment does not apply to and protect what are deemed as the most offensive firearms on the public market, then ultimately what does it apply to? The type of firearms more suitable for the purpose of hunting rather than self defense?
     
  16. PARTIZAN1

    PARTIZAN1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2015
    Messages:
    46,841
    Likes Received:
    18,955
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We have the absolute right of movement that corresponds to the right to drive a car.
     
  17. PARTIZAN1

    PARTIZAN1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2015
    Messages:
    46,841
    Likes Received:
    18,955
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The 2nd Amendment addresses two things. One the right to bear arms without stating for what purpose the other is that we have the right or duty to maintain a "well regulated" militia. Taking into consideration of that the times the Constitution was written and the reluctance of our new nation to have a large standing army and the threat of the Native American on the frontier I say that the right to hear arms is for defense of the community or the nation against outside forces.
     
  18. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Its an infringement on the right to keep and bear arms, and an arbitrary and capricious limit at that.
    No.
     
  19. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    See DC v Heller, etc.
    Additionally: See the Cruikshank case. The 2a doesn't create the right.
     
  20. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm sorry - nowhere in your post do I see an answer to my questions:
    - You mean give them 100rd magazines with the hope they will leave us alone?
    - What on earth makes you think that will happen?
    Well?
     
  21. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    False equivalence.
    Your right to travel does not me an you have a right to drive on public property.
    So, while you may have the right to travel on the roads, the state grants you the privilege to drive on them; it need only do so if you meet the requirements it sets.
     
  22. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Current jurisprudence says otherwise.
     
    Reality likes this.
  23. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Then why can they prevent you from doing it unless you pay money? You have a right to walk, not drive a car.
     
  24. PARTIZAN1

    PARTIZAN1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2015
    Messages:
    46,841
    Likes Received:
    18,955
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is a restriction on the right to bear arms just as it is a restriction on our right to have nuclear weapons. If you read and interpret the Constitution literally then one must conclude that the denial of our right to have nuclear weapons is arbitrary and caprious. As a matter of fact we are except under special circumstances restricted from bearing arms that are fully automatic or what some call a "machine gun". That is arbitrary and capricious.
     
  25. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, that is ALSO arbitrary and capricious. That doesn't mean your restriction on mag size isn't arbitrary and capricious
     

Share This Page