Poll: "Weapons of war"

[Member 53328]

My AR15 is trans. It transitioned from a weapon of war to a flower of peace. Liberals love the confused. Therefore they will love my rifle…. I mean flower.

 

[nwslopoke]

What war? Call people on their ignorant BS. They never know what they are talking. They write things that don't make sense and their minions believe them.

They don't know about calibers, ammo weight, cost, availability, ect... they just blurt fantasies from the late show.

 

[Yarome]

"Vastly more deadly military grade hardware of any type" - talk about misleading. No, everyone DOESN'T know that""weapons of war" are much more deadly", and many were designed to kill human beings. So what?

That's what's commonly known as sarcasm. It IS what the media and current political climate is trying to make people believe. Hence, the whole "assault weapon" and "weapons of war" labels in the first place. Ie., Children where killed by an AR "assault rifle". "Assault rifles" are "weapons of war". We must ban all "weapons of war" to save our innocent children.

Tapping into the deep horrors all reasonable people have in relation to war. By accepting that AR-15's are "weapons of war" we are partially validating their wacky narrative.

"Ban all rabbit guns!" doesn't really have the same impact.

 

[Member 3687]

So, what are weapons of war, let's see:

The 1911
The Beretta 92
The Sig M17 and M18 (320)
Remington 700
Mossberg 590
Glock 17 and 19
Winchester 1300 (now the SXP)
Springfield M1/M14
Ruger Mini 14/AC-556

These are a few of the guns you can find in most gun shops now that have been used, or are currently used in one form or other by militaries in the last 50 years.

This is not counting the tons of surplus military rifles and pistols out there that collectors currently have.

So, after they come for the our AR15 "weapons of war" what will they come for next from the weapons of war listed above, or will it be all of them!

Call it what you will, its just a ploy to fool the masses to get what they want.

 

[Paolung]

That's what's commonly known as sarcasm. It IS what the media and current political climate is trying to make people believe. Hence, the whole "assault weapon" and "weapons of war" labels in the first place. Ie., Children where killed by an AR "assault rifle". "Assault rifles" are "weapons of war". We must ban all "weapons of war" to save our innocent children.

Tapping into the deep horrors all reasonable people have in relation to war. By accepting that AR-15's are "weapons of war" we are partially validating their wacky narrative.

"Ban all rabbit guns!" doesn't really have the same impact.

I know it was sarcasm.

We aren't going to agree on this, and that's fine. But WHY ARE YOU SO INSISTENT UPON FORCING YOUR VIEW ON ME

See how it works? You can argue your points, and I can argue mine. No one is "forcing" anything here. We're just two dudes having a discussion that we disagree about certain aspects of. Cool.

So, what are weapons of war, let's see:

The 1911
The Beretta 92
The Sig M17 and M18 (320)
Remington 700
Mossberg 590
Glock 17 and 19
Winchester 1300 (now the SXP)
Springfield M1/M14
Ruger Mini 14/AC-556

These are a few of the guns you can find in most gun shops now that have been used, or are currently used in one form or other by militaries in the last 50 years.

This is not counting the tons of surplus military rifles and pistols out there that collectors currently have.

So, after they come for the our AR15 "weapons of war" what will they come for next from the weapons of war listed above, or will it be all of them!

Call it what you will, its just a ploy to fool the masses to get what they want.

Yep, as long as we let them control the narrative "weapons of war", nothing is safe. They'll fear monger it until 2A is completely obliterated by swaying public opinion. It's my contention that we should get in front of it and take the wind out of their sails by commandeering the term and controlling it before it's too late.

 

[Mark W.]

All I heard from that was... you have one too many 1895's, I have one too few, but I wouldn't be greedy and settle for you giving me the funky 1966 one.

What was the question again??

Sorry typo those are 1894's

 

[OldTengu]

So in my rack my
Hawkin style precession.50cal muzzle loader
1905 Winchester model 1895 in 30-40krag
1905 Winchester model 1897 12ga shotgun
1925/1938/1966 Winchester model 1895's
1918 Springfield 1903 30-06
Inland M1 carbine
Springfield M1 Grand
All my bolt action hunting rifles except my model 12 Savage
Remington 870 shotgun
1911
Star model B
Navy Arms 1858 New model Army .44cal

Are all weapons of war. Whats your point?

That if the term "weapon of war" in relation to AR15s sticks and becomes more common, despite not being used in war, the next firearms that the left attacks will be the ones that were or are currently in service, as that is a more direct parallel. Then every weapon becomes a "weapon of war", and they're coming after all of them.

So, what are weapons of war, let's see:

The 1911
The Beretta 92
The Sig M17 and M18 (320)
Remington 700
Mossberg 590
Glock 17 and 19
Winchester 1300 (now the SXP)
Springfield M1/M14
Ruger Mini 14/AC-556

These are a few of the guns you can find in most gun shops now that have been used, or are currently used in one form or other by militaries in the last 50 years.

This is not counting the tons of surplus military rifles and pistols out there that collectors currently have.

So, after they come for the our AR15 "weapons of war" what will they come for next from the weapons of war listed above, or will it be all of them!

Call it what you will, its just a ploy to fool the masses to get what they want.

This was my point as well.

 

[American123]

That if the term "weapon of war" in relation to AR15s sticks and becomes more common, despite not being used in war, the next firearms that the left attacks will be the ones that were or are currently in service, as that is a more direct parallel. Then every weapon becomes a "weapon of war", and they're coming after all of them.

This was my point as well.

Newsflash - they are after all of them regardless of what they are called.

 

[Yarome]

We aren't going to agree on this, and that's fine. But WHY ARE YOU SO INSISTENT UPON FORCING YOUR VIEW ON ME

See how it works? You can argue your points, and I can argue mine.

Cool, then we're in agreement that the AR is too.

Excuse me? Knock off the "yelling", Bud. I have made no such attempt. I very clearly stated more than once you are free to label your AR whatever you like and "owning it" however you choose is certainy your right. I simply restated my own opinion in more of a "defense mode" since you clearly didn't understand what I was presenting/accepting as my opinon.

Seemingly ignoring it and trying to twist my words into supporting "your" opinon. You did the same to a couple other people, and maybe it was just sarcasm/humor to summarize/restate their opinions into the polar opposite, but it didn't "read" that way.

For the last time:

I, (me) won't "own it" and validate the media's attempt to demonize my rifle by attempting to associate an individuals preconceptions, emotions, and beliefs about war and the deaths of innocents with the sole intent to infringe on my rights. That puts me in position to have to "re-educate" someone from the position of.... "It is, but mine is one of the good ones so it's okay if I own one."

It is a much stronger position, IMHO, to educate someone to the fact that the media's attempted association is incorrect and those deep seated negative opinons and feelings , with regard to "war", do not apply in the first place.

You are free to label your rifle and believe whatever you like!

If you're going to ask the question then be open to others opinions without an agenda to "convert" (in your own words) others to feel and act as you do.

~The End

 

[Paolung]

Excuse me? Knock off the "yelling", Bud. I have made no such attempt. I very clearly stated more than once you are free to label your AR whatever you like and "owning it" however you choose is certainy your right. I simply restated my own opinion in more of a "defense mode" since you clearly didn't understand what I was presenting/accepting as my opinon.

"Cool, then we're in agreemnt that the AR is too."

In reponse to me clearly stating it is NOT, IMO, and simply a "rifle".

Seemingly ignoring it and trying to twist my words into supporting "your" opinon. You did the same to a couple other people, and maybe it was just sarcasm/humor to summarize/restate their opinions into the polar opposite, but it didn't "read" that way.

For the last time:

I, (me) won't "own it" and validate the media's attempt to demonize my rifle by attempting to associate an individuals peconceptions, emotions, and beliefs about war and the deaths of innocents with the sole intent to infringe on my rights. That puts me in position to have to "re-educate" someone from the position of.... "It is, but mine is one of the good ones so it's okay if I own one."

It is a much stronger position, IMHO, to educate someone to the fact that the media's attempted association is incorrect and those deep seated negative opinons and feelings , with regard to "war", do not apply in the first place.

You are free to label your rifle and believe whatever you like!

If you're going to ask the question then be open to others opinions without an agenda to "convert" (in your own words) others to feel and act as you do.

~The End

Show me on the photo below where I told you we're in agreement.

Go ahead, I'll wait.




"If you're going to ask the question then be open to others opinions without an agenda to "convert" (in your own words) others to feel and act as you do."

No. You don't get to tell me how to ask questions or interact.

As far as your other comments, I'll ignore them as the damned horse is a zombie by now. But keep beating it if you like. I won't waste more time on this topic with you, as you don't seem to be able to distinguish humor from being serious, and that's a drag.

 

[308]

Even though we are required to treat the Brandon supporting, supposed "pro2A" members here with the utmost of kindness, excellence and sensual internet back rubs, it is quite relaxing at this point in my life to not give two shytz what they think or feel about a given subject…I truly believe their delusion is now terminal and all the reach arounds will not convince the delusional that they are….delusional.

All that being said, let's not forget John Wick kilt a bunch of dudes with a ball point pen.

 

[Paolung]

sensual internet back rubs

 

[Hueco]

The fight for the 2A will always be between people that know and understand firearms and the plethora of laws already on the books and those who have seen a prop gun being used in a movie.

How do you have a dialectic, focusing on the betterment of society, when the other side comes to the table with no knowledge of the thing they want banned?

Banning an item because you think it'll do something is juvenile. This is a complex topic and anyone thinking a bad is even possible isn't actually investing the time to begin learning.

I work for an Uber lefty company. Over 10,000 people on the internal message board. I have made two non-confrontational posts just defining words and stating current laws and correcting misconceptions, like "we need to get automatic weapons off our streets."

Out of the 10s of thousands, care to guess who has engaged with me to learn/debate in good faith? 3…that's it - three. Yet there are hundreds of posts virtue signaling.

Let that sink in. The "other side" doesn't want to understand the current reality and so their view will be flawed. Yet, they will have all the confidence of a child in a Superman costume.

Will I use the "weapon of war" label…no. I call them semi-automatic intermediate caliber carbines…because there is no other useful label.

 

[DunRanull]

The left calls a potato an abused minority so I wouldn't worry about it.

The lefties say that Joe Biden is an abused minority??

 

[RedRover]

Weapons of war refers to a situation not a gun.

This is an important distinction. It is an adjective('of war') modifying a noun('weapon'). It is akin to how the antis have applied 'assault' to 'rifle'.



As for the premise of the OP, I'm a stickler for semantics.

The semi-auto AR-15 was manufactured with the intention of and (since its inception) marketed as a civilian firearm. It has never been employed as a 'weapon of war' or as an 'assault* rifle' by any standing army in the world...ever...in its entire history.

*intended for soldiers to use in battle

The above can't be stated for these 'assault bows, spears and slings'.

 

[nwslopoke]

The semi-auto AR-15 was manufactured with the intention of and (since its inception) marketed as a civilian firearm. It has never been employed as a 'weapon of war' or as an 'assault* rifle' by any standing army in the world...ever...in its entire history.

It has high power magazines, you know. That sounds extra scary when shaky old women says it. It doesn't make sense but it sounds scary. Made up phrases being used, no less by news people. They are supposed to tell the truth.

People who say, weapons of war, know it's not true. Well, they know they have no idea what weapons are used in war but repeat it anyway. They can't even tell military time, know what planes are used in the military, basic rank structure, ect, but claim to be weapons of war experts.

 

[AnimalOne]

⬆⬆ This ⬆⬆

Weapon of war.

 

[308]

 

[308]

Here is a very brief documentary demonstrating the actions and prowess of those who seek to relieve you of your 'weapons of war'

 

[Aero Denezol]

I do not know how to make my position any clearer.

The phrase "Weapons of War" was not coined by Second Amendment advocates. It was coined by people who want to ultimately outlaw private firearms ownership in the USA.

They coined the phrase to portray us as anti-government, potentially violent, extremists. It is not a good thing to be portrayed as a anti-government, warlike, potentially violent, extremists.

If Second Amendment supporters are able to be portrayed as extremists then millions of citizens who support the Second Amendment, (Think Soccer Mom's) may be turned against private firearms ownership.

Politics is theater requiring all to play their roles. You will either take part in the theater or you will be taken apart by the theater.

^^^Great post.

This is one of the greatest tricks of the Bolshevist Utopist Left: to redefine common words in plain English.