{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/4/2016 7:08:38 PM
91
"I need guns to defend myself!"
[b]"I need my AR15 to defend myself!"[/b]
[i]"Really? I mean I get it, these rifles are incredibly fun to shoot, hitting a target far away is extremely gratifying, but defense? If you're in the back country maybe that argument can help, but even then there are better rifles to defend yourself with."[/i]
[b]"No! I mean defend myself against the government! They're going to come and take our guns and put us all into slavery unless we fight back!"[/b]
[i]"Ignoring the fact there's no evidence that they're planning on doing that, what makes you think you can defend yourself? I spent time in the military, during my deployments we would go into houses and shoot guys who had bigger guns than you have... That's ignoring the fact that they could just park a tank outside, or that an Apache can blow up your house from behind a mountain, or a sub can just launch missiles from off the coast..."[/i]
[b]"Well the military will be on our side!"[/b]
[i]"So then who are you defending yourself against?"[/i]
[b]"The government!"[/b]
[i]"So the military will be on your side, but you need to defend against the government? Is Obama going to be the one kicking in your door in this scenario? Is Joe Biden flying the F22?"[/i]
[b]"No..."[/b]
-
Arguments are kind of dumb on both sides it seems. "We need to ban assault weapons!" you mean the least used guns? "But they can cause the most damage!" there are .50 cal handguns, and its a lot easier to swing those around. "Yes but they are more accurate at longer ranges!" Yet is seems like most of these gun shootings happen at close range, in side things like schools, malls, colleges, movie theaters, and churches. But please, ban those long guns I could so easily miss someone walking in with so they are now forced to use the clearly much harder to hide handgun. I'm sure I'll have a quicker reaction time when someone pulls a handgun from no where and shoots me point blank than if i saw them coming from the parking lot with an assault rifle. "Well lets ban all guns!" ...okay fine. Oh, how are you going to remove all the guns already on the streets? How are you going to pay for the enforcement of these new rules? Oh, and can I still build my own assault weapons and not need to register them like the current laws in some places? "Well of course you cannot build your own gun! And we'll just add it to the budget!" ...you mean the one we already don't have the money for? Okay, you try that. Mean while I will go open up a gun store and get rich from each major shooting since people run to the gun stores thinking you are going to finally ban their favorite toy each time a shooting happens. By the time you actually get anything done i'll be rich, can write off whatever you ban as a loss, and just move to a new business. Good luck getting all those new guns off the street that people just bought from me!
-
1 RespuestaHandguns are way better for home defense than ars, but I bought a nice ar 15 just because they are fun as hell to shoot
-
[b] [/b]
-
In the event of a coup I'd like a handy AR and a good friend/dog/friendly dog by my side.
-
But I'm concerned with trying to defend myself against the government, I'm concerned with defending myself from criminals with guns.
-
Biden seems more of an A-10 kind of guy.
-
Odds are the military would be split in half if an uprising happened. Some would fight for the citizen rebels while the others would be loyalists. Half the military with armed rednecks? [spoiler]Yeah we'd win easily![/spoiler]
-
So if I'm in a situation where I need to defend myself from a gun, I'm screwed? Just becuase it may be made a law doesn't mean people won't still have (and use) them. Any law abiding people are completely screwed because they actually did the right thing.
-
13 RespuestasSo you're saying that the Oath taken by the military (namely, US Marine Corp.) to defend the U.S. Constitution and it's patriots was just a bunch of BS? You're saying it's better to live oppressed and controlled than die fighting for what's right? You're saying the absolute power weilded by the US Government you have described above to make the Sovereign bend to it's will is par for the course and should be ignored?
-
3 RespuestasFun fact: Nearly 30% of Americans believe that an "an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties” during the next few years. Sauce: https://www.rt.com/usa/americans-revolution-armed-percent-738/
-
5 RespuestasI don't know if it's just me or what, but why do people want to ban guns? Have you been on YouTube you can LITERALLY learn how to make a gun out of iron pipes. Next step is to ban iron pipes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
31 RespuestasThis has nothing to do with the ar-15 specifically. This has to do with opening the door to taking much more than that one weapon platform. After all an ar-15 is just a glorified semi automatic rifle. So if they can pull off banning it then semi auto rifles like the ruger 10/22, m1 garand, m1a, modern browning bar hunting variants, winchester 1907 self loading rifle, and a multitude of other rifles are the next target. After that, semi auto pistols would be next on the chopping block, because after all, if you don't need semi auto rifles why would you need a semi auto pistol. Shotguns are too dangerous they do to much damage to the thing being shot, ban it! Next Lever actions get attacked because some are considered to be high capacity. After this bolt action rifles would more than likely be next because they are a "sniper weapon" and are far too dangerous for people to own. This is a quite valid slippery slope argument.
-
8 RespuestasEditado por BlackMormon: 10/4/2016 9:44:05 PMOk military man[spoiler]bullshit[/spoiler] the services are not binary. Some will follow orders against the people other will take their tanks and drive away to join up with the people. Are you saying that because a fight isn't winnable one should not fight? Why are all the anti gun tards so hung up on the AR-15? Is it because it's black?
-
>when Mad Max tries to peddle he is ex military Lol ok
-
2 RespuestasEditado por Ape King Ira: 10/5/2016 11:01:42 AMIts funny how you actually didn't have a real argument with a guy. Just an argument you had trapped from the start to be in your favor. AR-15's are compatible with military grade rounds, like 5.56's, and compatible with the civilian .223's. Its perfect for defence because the government could turn on us, like the Military Coup in Turkey, or if we are being invaded by foreign countries. Just because we haven't been in anything as serious as world war 2 for the past 80 years doesn't mean we'll sll be safe forever. Id rather be ready instead of being caught with my pants down. The future is looking pretty dark for America. Black Lives Matter and this George Soros and the pact he has with our Democratic party is putting me on edge. I wish America was the safe space it was 20 years ago for some northern Whitey like me, but it isn't. Im prepared. Im not letting some liberal talk me out of staying safe.
-
15 RespuestasThe 2nd Amendment, part of the bill of rights, also known as the rights guaranteed to individual citizens, is the [u]ONLY[/u] Amendment that ends in "shall not be infringed." It's intent is cemented in the writings and speeches of our founders as the people's power against tyranny. In fact, its nearly indisputable without some sort of liberal mental gymnastics that really only proves the left, not only doesn't know what the Constitution is about, that they also don't particularly care for it. Yet while the lefty, anti-American, globalist pigs will tell you that you don't need guns to defend yourself, they'll also openly attack law enforcement as being untrustworthy... so go figure. Fortunately, the Amendment preceding #2, allows them to voice their uneducated, under developed, self loathing prattling, while being protected by the powers guaranteed to the PEOPLE by the second.
-
1 Respuesta[quote]"Really? I mean I get it, these rifles are incredibly fun to shoot, hitting a target far away is extremely gratifying, but defense? If you're in the back country maybe that argument can help, but even then there are better rifles to defend yourself with."[/quote]"Really?" is not an argument. For the rest see pic related.
-
4 RespuestasDo I need a reason to own one? Last I checked I live in a free country and have the second amendment. The government already limits my second amendment rights enough through the NFA. And what's with the demonization of rifles (particularly the AR15)? Last I checked, firearm murders using a rifle (around 300 a year) is only a fraction of total murders using firearms. And if you knew shit about guns you would know that an AR15 is one of the best weapons to use to defend your home not only because of the ease of use but also they are more safe due to their lack of over penetration unlike shotguns which you run the risk of over penetration. Even if I didn't use my AR15 to defend myself & family and use to hunt, I still don't need a reason to own one.
-
The LA riots are quite literally a liberal nightmare. It proves for 1 that 30 round mags are actually useful for self defense and not mass shootings, and secondly it proves that blacks CAN in fact be racist, according to the liberal definition.
-
4 RespuestasMax. This is idiotic. The reasoning is very simple and im sure you can follow it. If a gun makes me safe, a better gun makes me safer. If one bullet is a deterrent, 30 bullets are a stronger deterrent. An AR-15 is a better tool than an M9. A less competent shooter would do much better with an AR. This isnt a movie. Not everyone can land a headshot with their pistol while being in a state of panic. Its very very simple. If a gun is a deterrent, a more powerful gun is a more powerful deterrent.
-
4 RespuestasYou must only talk to the dumbest republicans. Typical lib.
-
8 RespuestasEditado por Leone: 10/5/2016 10:21:19 AMI live in the woods, the police response time is about 45 minutes. So if a robber breaks into my house ARMED will i wait 45 minutes for the police or defend family? I'llgo with the latter
-
1 RespuestaWhat's funny about this is that people are trying to ban this gun essentially because it looks scary. "Assault rifle" ammunition does way less damage to a person than a Shotgun, which can literally blow off chunks of your body. The scary part is, if the government can ban the AK, which causes less damage, what's to stop them from taking other forms of firearms using the same methods? I live in the country where police response time is a half hour at least, regardless of whether I have a shotgun or an AK, I can defend myself, but how long until all of our weapons are taken away?
-
Most people who follow the bold text don't seem to understand the 2nd Amendment fully. I thought it was about protecting ourselves from tyranny, not hunting.... Point is, the guns can't be taken away. So bold text guy is stupid
-
1 RespuestaAR 15 wasn't meant for the public when it was conceived so it should just stay with the military but otherwise gun laws aren't going to work. People who want to go and kill people will go to the black market.
-
Regardless of guns law are approved, people who are f*cked in the head, they will get a gun illegally. It's not the guns that are the problem but the host who is pulling that trigger.
