The AR-15 follies: Here we go again!

I don’t know why you keep hanging on particular guns but for the umpteenth time. In the possession of a qualified person, there is little to fear. But in the hands of criminals which the right wants to arm, there is much to fear by a police force.

 

In your convoluted thought process, I’m sure you feel that way. In the eyes of the SC, that’s not true.

 

Guess you didn’t read Heller. Its only handguns unlocked in the home that were addressed. They still have to be registered to carry about the home in operative form if and there is no mention of .50 cal or AR15 with a pistol grip. Why is it incompatible. The decision goes on to say, that your rights are not absolute and the municipality can regulate (but not ban) any arm it chooses.

 

It demonstrably does not.

The court held no such thing. Registration was not the issue before the court. Heller has exactly nothing to do with registration. You’ve been shown this no less than 10 times so far in this thread, so having had this shown to you, you know that claiming it does is a lie.

 

It is because outlawing those particular guns is a violation of Heller.

Pistol grips and flash suppressors do not make guns become any more dangerous in the hands of criminals.

That is incorrect. Heller recognizes the right to have guns for self defense.

I did.

That is incorrect. Heller addresses the right to have guns for self defense.

There is however mention of the right to have guns for self defense.

Because such laws cannot be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

They can regulate only if the regulations can be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

 

The issue is whatever the court makes it. They went out of their way to say firearms could be regulated. Then they went out of their way to say Heller could gain relief, only if he was qualified.
Dream on. It’s been ten years and counting.....care to make it twenty ? Not only that, trump executive ordered to the FDA bump stocks are illegal .....the court refused to strike it down. That’s called regulation

 

Only if the regulations can be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

If someone cannot be disqualified for limited specific reasons (like a criminal record), that makes them qualified.

I think it is high time that the courts started enforcing Heller.

That's regulation that can be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

 

If you have AP ammo and you don't need it, your rounds will be less effective, and you'll have to worry about what's behind whatever you are shooting at. But you will still be able to defend yourself.

If you don't have AP ammo and you do need it, then you're screwed.

 

Sure if someone can handle the recoil, the .44 magnum or .454 Casull will be a better choice for bear defense. But only if they can handle the recoil.

If they can't handle the recoil, they'll be better served with a gun that they are able to handle.

 

No argument there. But recoil sensitivity is about practice and it’s personal. That’s why any revolver/bolt, lever and pump long arm is literally “ tune-a-able” to felt recoil.

A .357 revolver can be “tuned” for anything from .38 target loads and snake shot to muzzle energy that rivals a 10 mm, and literally loaded in the same weapon. And a pump shot gun, the same.

There aren't many weapons you can use to bird hunt and give dependable self defense for a grizzly.

Semi autos are great but they’re specialty weapons for designed purposes whose flexibility is in a much narrower range. The advantage is fire power, indiscriminate fire power. So yes, you can even use an AR15 for self defense v Grizzlies, as long as you have very high cap mags and plenty if ammo.....and a few other caveats.

 

why do you post things you know are not true? The issue is what is filed before the court. In heller, registration had exactly nothing to do with it, which is why the court did not, because they could not, rule on it.

it doesn't matter how many times you say this. You know it is false.

 

Armed and ready for ********ers like you is where I am at. You will never take a single gun from real Americans.

 

Well, the making up sht is alive and well. I posted a synopsis that delusional wannabes don’t or refuse to read because the fakery is too easy to repeat.
Go ahead. Quote where the findings say regulation has nothing to do with Heller....go for it.

 

And the bottom line why I know your post are FOS is this.....

after ten years with every new regulation by states.....nearly everyone has not been over turned since Heller.
ASAMOF, with a conservative dominated Supreme Court
So really, you’re laughable, even if you can’t / don’t even read.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...rol-second-amendment-limits-column/729202002/

 

Totally false the FDA does not regulate firearms.

 

You are moving the goalposts. You said heller was about registration. That is demonstrably false. Also, as you’ve been shown, the only regulation out before the court in Heller was struck down.

 

It does not matter how many times you repeat this. You know your post is a lie.

 

That’s funny. At least I provide evidence. A typical lie has none.
Maybe in your world of Oz, if you keep repeating it, maybe it will magically become true......burp.

 

No, we’ll take 100s from gun crazed lunatics and criminals who measure their manhood by their ownership.

 

This over worked phrase by deniers who don’t know what they are talking about, is proof positive of fraud.
If anything said was demonstratively false, you’d have proved it. That’s what honest people do. They provide evidence.

 

Cool story.

"NSSF tracks the background checks associated with the sale of a firearm based on the FBI’s National Instant Background Check System (NICS). NSSF-adjusted NICS checks for January through July 2020 is a record 12.1 million, which is up 71.7 percent from the 7.1 million NSSF-adjusted NICS January through July 2019. This equates to nearly 5 million first-time gun owners in the first seven months of 2020."

https://www.nssf.org/first-time-gun-buyers-grow-to-nearly-5-million-in-2020/
----------------------------------------

In 2020, the FBI received more than 137 thousand requests for gun background checks---compared to a little more than 90 thousand in 2019.

The numbers also show 40 percent of those customers were first-time gun buyers and women.

Mary Bunnell of Auburn is one of them.

"For me it's safety, it's all about safety," said Bunnell.

Bunnell is single and lives alone.

"I want to be able to be in a situation where I can take care of myself, protect myself."

Bunnell bought her first gun in July. She wanted a second handgun for training. But had to wait months to get it due to high demand.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/r...en-by-first-time-buyers-and-women/ar-BB1cMAYl

-------------------------------------

Record numbers of first time gun buyers in 2020. Record number of women first time gun buyers too.

 

Neat ad hominem, only applies to men though. Have you got anything for the record number of women gun owners?

 

Not everyone is born to run.

 

My License To Carry permit negates the need for a NICS check.

Try again.

 

Gifting a firearm may not be a thing where you are, but it is a thing in many places. I just gifted a pistol to my youngest daughter, and I do expect you to be mad that I didn't get a BC on her before hand.

Tough.