Why I just bought an M4

Indeed, a Windham M4.

For those not familiar with Windham, they are the former Bushmaster factory, personnel, and equipment. The Bushmaster name was sold to some group who decided to make crap instead of decent guns, and the former folk just started back up. Great gun, very well made, very well priced.

Anyway, I had been mulling over the idea of buying one for a while, mostly waiting until they went on sale. I was also interested in the M&P Sport, but there is nothing available at this moment. I called up my local gun shop, and they had sold 8 AR/M4’s in the morning and had nothing left, and were not scheduled to get anything in. They checked and could not order anything. Nationwide they were selling out.

So I remembered that Big 5 was carrying them and though I hate Big 5 I went down there and they had my Windham. Paid in full, pick it up on the 19th.

So why? Do I need one? What use do they have?

In short, I could live without one. I can also without seeing Ann Coulter’s thong again, but I still want to. So I do not really need one. For use? Plinking I guess, and maybe some pig hunting for the small ones would be fun. Not the most accurate rifle ever, but out to 100 yards I suppose it will do.

In reality, I want one for one big reason. To give a big “(*)(*)(*)(*) you” to everyone left, right, or anywhere on the scale that wants to regulate my life in any way.

You see, I am an adult. I pay my own bills. I pay my own taxes. I bought my own home. I don’t need any legislator anywhere to dictate how I live my life. I don’t need them to tell me what guns I can and cannot have. Going further, I don’t need them to tell me whom I can marry. What religion I should follow. In short, I bought it simply because there will be day soon where it is illegal.

So why will it be illegal? To me, it is no different than a knife, a machete, or even a simple side by side shotgun. All of those in the right (or wrong) hands are just as deadly. They will do just as much damage. They will kill, maim, murder, whatever you want to call it, they will do.

Furthermore, when we react out of pure emotion, when we start sacrificing our rights for a false sense of safety, we might as well just pick a king. Airport safety (*)(*)(*)(*), banning guns, left or right, both parties are wrong.

In short, that was just my $1100 statement telling the world that I do not need anyone to dictate my life for me.

 

20 people standing 40 feet away from you.....ballpark guess-

1. How many can you kill in 30 seconds with a machete?

2. How many can you kill in 30 seconds with a Windham/Bushmaster M4?

Is there a "differential" in those two figures.

 

How many can I kill? None. I have no desire or intention to use any firearm on a person or group of people in the scenario you describe.

 

Well, it's your right to do so, but I can think of cheaper ways to make a political statement.

Matthew 26:52
"Put away your sword," Jesus told him. "Those who use the sword will die by the sword.

I know you're not Christian so the prior scripture won't hold much meaning for you...but scripture does often reflect wisdom whether or not you impart divinity to it or it.

I take no issue with people owning and acquiring semi-automatic "military style" rifles or magazines that hold 30 - 100 rounds...it's their choice and if it's legal, well, it's legal to do so.
End of debate.

However the growing paranoia, whether it's the soccer Mom afraid of getting attacked in the parking lot..or "preppers" waiting for doomsday....this growing paranoia that life is merely an exercise in horror survival and Social Darwinsim..well it's a said reflection on the state of affairs. We don't aspire to the creation of art, music, literature, architecture...technology..things that uplift the human spirit...we aspire to survive this perception, a bad guy awaits around every corner, the government will place us all in "re-education" camps...or whatever motivates people to stockpile weapons beyond hunting for food or plinking at beer cans. A genuine fear has taken over.

First off...nobody gets out alive...for every gun you have..your neighbor has the same...the bad guys will have the same...chaos will ensue and survival will be more a matter of luck than preparations..if indeed the (*)(*)(*)(*) ever hit the fan. Now, in a practical sense, protecting yourself and/or your loved ones from an intruder...a home defense weapon makes some sense...but semi-automatic "military style" rifle...isn't the best choice in that regard to ward off a criminally intent intruder.

If indeed, these scenarios come to pass, wherein...societal collapses as a whole...and you have your trusty M16 or M4 look-alike with ammo crates stockpiled in your basement...you won't last longer than anyone else...because the guy next to you, behind you..and in front of you...will be equally armed and there will be no clear identifying of friend or foe.

So buy all the guns you want...

live by the sword...die by the sword

Another nail in the coffin of American culture.

 

Didn't say "would"...said "can". OU said "it is no different than a knife, a machete".

So answer my question....if the weapons are "no different"....the number of dead if a person WERE to use them against 20 people standing 40 feet away in 30 seconds....

should be IDENTICAL. Right?

 

To the contrary, I accept your Jesus as a moral guide, just not as a son of a god.

That being said, I understand your point. Fortunately for me, I do not "live by the sword". I am as potentially dangerous as Ovaltine. I believe in calling the police before anything else.

I simply do not need to have the government protect me from myself.

 

Your question is flawed, and presumes incorrectly that causation and desire are not required for tool operation.

Dead is dead is dead. One bullet will kill a person as fast as 20.

 

"...whether it's the soccer Mom afraid of getting attacked in the parking lot..or "preppers" waiting for doomsday....this growing paranoia that life is merely an exercise in horror survial and Social Darwinsim..well it's said reflection on the state of affairs."

Taxcutter says:
More to the point: We don't trust government. Government has become the enemy.

 

There is only one intelligent and justifiable reason to own a gas operated semi auto firing magazine fed high capacity rifle --

- to comply with the militia clause of the 2nd Amendment.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

If you do not know what the militia clause is, then you should study Scalia's write up of the majority opinion in the Heller v. DC case.

If you are going to hunt, don't use your assault weapon. Choose a bolt or lever action higher calibre rifle instead.

If you are going to plink, then 22LR ammo is much cheaper.

If you are going to defend your home, then a shotgun is superior.

For self defense, a pistol or revolver is best.

Have fun with your new toy.

 

The soccer mom in CT would have been much better off with a 410 shotgun for her self defense of her home however.

The only thing that her Bushmaster accomplished was to allow her wacko son to blow away a lot of kids and school teachers.

 

Careful TFM, your OP contains ideas which sound dangerously Libertarian, or otherwise 'small government' in nature.



Congrats on the new rifle btw.

 

No...my question is based on YOUR statement-

"To me, it is no different than a knife, a machete..."

So I am asking about a use scenario and asking you if a machete and a Windham M4 rifle are "no different' in that use scenario.

You want to talk "tools"....fine. 40 people tied to a boards, in 30 seconds, can a person kill more of them with a wrench or a power saw? both "tools" and according to your theory "no different".

 

Then why don't you accept the label "anarchist"???

 

Nope. There are multiple reasons.

Why? What if I prefer an AR-15 over my 15lb. target rifle?

A .22 like this?

That is all relative and dependent on who you ask.

I am going to assume you have never participated in a self-defense course? Thats ok. However you are not in a position of authority and should stop acting like one.

 

One bullet CAN kill someone, but that is not garunteed. And certainly, I would think 20 bullets has a much higher chance of killing someone than a single bullet would.

The question is valid. Until we as a country reach the point where we can force or convince enough people to change their moral values to ones respecting life, the only way to reduce the number of killings is to make it more difficult.

It is much easier to kill with a gun that a bat, for example.

 

TFY declared there was "no difference" between a machete and a M4....why is it not valid to ask him the "efficacy" of those weapons in an IDENTICAL situation....and ask if their death-toll would be "no different"???

 

Not quite as simple as that, is it? Certainly that is not what i said in it's entirety.

Let's review.

So why will it be illegal? To me, it is no different than a knife, a machete, or even a simple side by side shotgun. All of those in the right (or wrong) hands are just as deadly. They will do just as much damage. They will kill, maim, murder, whatever you want to call it, they will do.

 

Yep the government shot up a classroom full of kids. And lit up a movie theater. Government is what you should be scared of, yet government spies and keeps tracks of your everyday online activity...and we keep hush about things as long as it's not intrusive.

We have the right to speak out on over zealous armaments, and to push legislation for it. I have fired and have plenty of friends who own guns, many own multiple guns. I like guns, but I know most of all this bull (*)(*)(*)(*) is overkill, no pun intended. That woman should never of been allowed to hold that many guns. And I believe anyone who owns multiple assault rifles or weaponry should be subject to inspection to see they are protecting their weapons adequately. The vast majority of it is overkill. Seriously one hang gun is all I need to to protect a home in your typical community, if you need more then that you seriously need to practice your shooting. Farms should be equipped with something that is more stable for longer distance. If I need more then that, I'm as good as dead. And I would say that applies to most Americans.

 

Yes...let's review...see above.

40 feet away....20 people....30 seconds before the perp is gunned down. Which is deadlier in the wrong hands? Which does more damage?

1. a machete?

2. a Windam M4?

 

The 40 yard is your invention, not mine, meant to interrupt and set a false set of parameters to make your argument and your viewpoint valid, though it is not.

I understand your argument has little to no merits, and seeks to blame an object for the actions, willful or not, of these shooters. If you look at my OP clearly you can see where I addressed such emotional and reactive laws like what you seek.

 

"That woman should never been allowed to hold that many guns", the voice of tyranny of the Statist.

 

Conversely, one swing of a bat can kill someone, whilst 20 probably will. So why not ban bats that you can swing more than once? Doesn't that make as much sense as banning a gun that shoots 12 while leaving a gun that shoots 10 alone?

However, like the gun, the bat is not operating independently. It is simply an object.

 

Not if you do not know how the weapon operates. Killing a kid with a baseball bat is probably pretty easy I would guess.

 

Oh, so you own a handgun and you are an expert on the interest and hobby?

That is cute.

Is there some other issue you might actually be an authority on?

 

It's funny how different people see the same situation differently, that's exactly how I feel about Wall Street and Private Corporations.