Why Do You Need An AR-15/AK-47/Military Style Rifle etc?

[USMC-03]

Don't forget the Federalist Papers, the "user's manual for the Constitution." EDIT: There is no clearer voice on the Constitution's meaning than James Madison himself, as the man who wrote it...

Agreed, but the Federalist requires a much bigger commitment. Brilliant writing however and well worth the effort.

 

[Diamondback]

Agreed, but the Federalist requires a much bigger commitment. Brilliant writing however and well worth the effort.

Glenn Beck's "The Original Argument" is a pretty good Cliffs Notes and For Dummies all-in-one.

 

[3MTA3]

Do all Quislings know they are Quislings? Or just some? Bah, does it matter even matter?

Some people have been conditioned to think that natural rights are privileges. The natural right to defend yourself has nothing to do with hunting or target shooting. We are now seeing in Great Britain that they are now even confiscating knives, tools and scissors.

OMG: Take a look at these 'weapons' found by British police during a sweep

"The Metropolitan Police launched "Operation Sceptre" in 2015 to combat knife crime, and in March, the Regents Park Police tweeted a photo of items found and safely disposed of during an Operation Sceptre weapon sweep. The photo was picked up an went viral Monday in light of England's reinvigorated push against knife attacks.

​

As soon as we concede "assault rifles", the left will just move to the next phase, likely pistols. Then it will be pump and lever actions, then it will be everything except a single shot open sight rifle, then it will be knives.

The ruling class wants you disarmed so they can rule you. In order to rule they need subjects. To make you a subject all natural rights will be stripped away and replaced by privileges that can be granted or taken away as desired.

The thing about Quislings is that they think they will get to be puppet masters and not puppets. What they are are traitors, and when they are no longer needed their masters won't want any one hanging around that have already proven they will sell out their own country.

 

[Boboclown]

You know... I don't need an AR-15 or an AK...











What I need is more FALs.

 

[birdmove]

Well, it's been fun. The insults, which are BS, are not needed. But go ahead and drive away people that may disagree with you, and enjoy the bubble you're in.

 

[Boboclown]

Not everyone is insulting you. While I disagree with insulting others over disagreements, its understandable given how heated this topic can get. If anything, the insults were tame compared to how out of hand this kind of discussion could get.

 

[slimmer13]

Well, it's been fun. The insults, which are BS, are not needed. But go ahead and drive away people that may disagree with you, and enjoy the bubble you're in.

Oh no. So now you won't support our right to own non Fudd guns? Oh wait

With "friends" like these........

 

[3MTA3]

Well, it's been fun. The insults, which are BS, are not needed. But go ahead and drive away people that may disagree with you, and enjoy the bubble you're in.

Sorry you can't tolerate opinions that differ with your own. I'm also sorry that you think you can compromise with the left on gun control. Note that they have never compromised and once a right has been taken it is never given back. The progressive left is a boa constrictor wrapped around your chest, and every time you breath out it just squeezes a little bit more until you can no longer breath in.

 

[bbbass]

Glenn Beck's "The Original Argument" is a pretty good Cliffs Notes and For Dummies all-in-one.

Yes, I have this in my collection, read it, enjoyed it, and often refer back to it. Highly recommend it. As you know, it was written by a student, brilliant guy!!!

 

[bbbass]

Well, it's been fun. The insults, which are BS, are not needed. But go ahead and drive away people that may disagree with you, and enjoy the bubble you're in.

You come in, say to go ahead and insult, then you get insulted... You got what you wanted/expected. Now you are complaining??? Go figure.

 

[Mark W.]

Well one answer I can think of is I needed a rifle with less power to use on varmits and so my shoulder doesn't hurt so much after an afternoon of target shooting.

 

[pharmseller]

First, the dems have been in power in the past. I still have my guns and bet you have yours. I'm quite sure there are some extremists that would like to ban all firearms. It's a long way from there being a few to confiscating all firearms. There are plenty of extremists that want to perpetuate a fear of banning all firearms. It's not going to happen. There are plenty of democrats that own firearms, compete, hand load etc, and I'm one of them. There will be one way anyone takes my guns, and that's when I'm off to meet my maker. You may feel the same way. I don't waste too much time worrying. Social media has been one way to get a panic going. Pizza gate? A phony but official looking piee I saw on Facebook I think before the election stating HRC threatened to overturn the second amendment AND ban the NRA. The Facebook piece claimed these things were said in an interview with the Des Moines Registry newspaper. I smelled an odr, so took a minute to go to that papers website. The home page referred to this piece and said though they did review HRC, these statements were never made in the interview. I"m not here to defend HRC, but made up BS isn't the way to go about things.
The dude that originally wrote a piece about "pizza gate" is an attorney of all things, and admitted in a filmed interview that he just makes things up and slaps it on the web. As you know, a shooter went to that pizza restaurant, and even fired shots. It was all BS. I am skeptical of what I read especially on the web, and that's from either side of this issue.
I don't believe that anyone is after all our firearms. And I don't give people like Alex Jones, Rush etc any credibility. I have not read the Heller decision from the Supreme Court, but I don't think that august body has said that the second guarantees any citizens the right to own ANY firearm.

First, thank you for taking the time to respond.

I read your response carefully and the only conclusion that I can draw is that you say it won't happen because it hasn't happened. With respect, your response makes no sense. That's the bad news, because now I have nothing to go on.

The good news is, you have every right to your opinion, however nonsensical it may be.

It reminds me of the old joke about the guy who fell off a 100-story building. All the way down people heard him saying, "So far, so good."





P

 

[Coastal_Tim]

Because the M F 'r next door is jacked up and strapped w/ G&A so when he goes off I need a chance to save my family before the authorities arrive to wait and figure out how to assess then act. If that doesn't make sense to anyone then go to the f$&!in sense store and get enough to figure it out.

 

[NW Backpacker]

When I hear "I don't need guns the police will protect me!" I point out that the police, while not required to protect them, will make their best effort but will take 5 to 10 minutes to get there.

In town the police may be there in 5 to 10 minutes. In a rural area, they may take 30 minutes or an hour - maybe longer. Thus rural residents must defend themselves - there is NO government "law enforcement". It is immoral to restrict the type of gun or the number of bullets a gun can hold - especially so for those in rural areas who have no police protection. It is not hard to imagine a scenario where a well-sighted-in AR could mean life for the home-owner's family; and where a gun with less accuracy, fewer bullets, or slower rate of fire could mean death for that family.

 

[NW Backpacker]

Here is a scene from a WW2 movie. It's just a movie, but I suspect similar scenarios likely occurred in real life many times. Every time I watch the first 2 minute clip, I wish the people in this home had a couple of ARs. The second clip below shows the result of not having ARs. Sad that we have a RABBI pushing IP43 who does not comprehend the harsh reality of the world around him. Apparently he learned nothing from the tragic history of his own people. 2 clips:

With that long driveway, these people could have taken cover and killed the soldiers, but they had no ARs!

A few minutes later in the movie, this is the result of being disarmed:

 

[NW Backpacker]

.....A phony but official looking piee I saw on Facebook I think before the election stating HRC threatened to overturn the second amendment AND ban the NRA.
......I don't believe that anyone is after all our firearms.QUOTE]



NW Backpacker reply to Birdmove: (can't figure out why the entire post looks like a quote)
No one is after all our firearms? Tell that to the people in D.C., or Morton Grove, Ill, etc - if they didn't take all of them, they sure did restrict them severely.

On HRC, here she is all for Australia style confiscation. This is what she publicly said on the campaign trail - imagine what her actual beliefs were! The "buy backs" were mandatory and they were not just for handguns:

 

[SUPER X]

Never give up the high ground or the language.

I always place the burden back on them and ask, "Please explain to me why it's any business of yours or anyone else's what I own." The trick is keeping them on point and separating fact from opinions. But if done right, watching the mental backflips can be rather entertaining.

That is fun and might convert someone' train of thought.

 

[SUPER X]

The question keeps coming up from liberal politicians and gun control activists and is becoming a meme in both news and increasingly among personal discussions.

I don't like to off put people with a flat "because it's my right" or "because I can" or a blatant "Eff you". None of those answers can possibly put a shred of doubt in their minds about the gun control position that's been drummed into their heads by the MSM or their teachers. All you get with that tactic is a closed mind that will now make certain they will vote in order to get even.

When I hear "nobody needs a military style rifle to hunt or defend themselves" I tell them that there is not a single firearm from the first black powder gun to the musket to the flintlock to the lever, bolt and semi automatic that wasn't at one time a military weapon. You name it, it started out as a weapon of war.

When I hear "you don't need an AR-15 to hunt deer" I tell them that they are correct, and while there are other choices many people use them to hunt. While I don't hunt with an AR-15, I do have an AR-15 for self defense.

When I hear "You don't need an AR-15 for self defense" I tell them that while they are free to choose how they want to defend themselves I want the most effective defensive weapon I can find to protect my family. Then I ask them if they would prefer to be under gunned if they were defending their family or if they would prefer to have an advantage over the attacker.

When I hear "I don't need guns the police will protect me!" I point out that the police, while not required to protect them, will make their best effort but will take 5 to 10 minutes to get there. I ask them how they are going to stay alive long enough to protect their families - remember the school shooting only lasted six minutes and 20 seconds.

These kind of questions are going to become more common over the next several months so I suggest we be prepared to answer them. We also IMO need to make the argument emotional because most people struggle to keep their eyes open when you dump a bunch of facts on them, so I let them open that door before reminding them that, for example, the crime rate in Australia was decreasing at the same rate before and after the mandatory gun buy back.

What do you tell people when asked "Why should anybody need..."?

Listening to those idiots is mentally exhausting.

 

[Boboclown]

In town the police may be there in 5 to 10 minutes. In a rural area, they may take 30 minutes or an hour - maybe longer. Thus rural residents must defend themselves - there is NO government "law enforcement". It is immoral to restrict the type of gun or the number of bullets a gun can hold - especially so for those in rural areas who have no police protection. It is not hard to imagine a scenario where a well-sighted-in AR could mean life for the home-owner's family; and where a gun with less accuracy, fewer bullets, or slower rate of fire could mean death for that family.

Even in towns... A lot can happen in 5-10 minutes. Seconds matter.

 

[nwslopoke]

My crystal ball is broken so I can't predict the future. Gun grabbers don't have any solutions where government isn't the answer. When government puts them on hold they hold. When government doesn't make them a priority (security, medical, ect) they wait. When government says no, they don't have a response. A firearm is as important as food, water and shelter.