Why you can’t ban AR-15s

So you are saying that we shouldn't ban assault weapons because that would "only" prevent a quarter of the shootings?

Assault Rifles are not the cause. They are the instrument. One of the instruments, if you want. Remove that, and you make it harder to kill people.

Easy as that!

Your argument is pure nonsense. It's like saying that we shouldn't keep nuclear weapons away from terrorists because that wouldn't have prevented 9-11.

 

You already HAVE that rifle. I want to ban future sales.

And yes. if you really need that many rounds to hunt...future rifles of that kind can be made with integrated magazines.. That's not a high bar.

PS.sorry you're such a bad shot. Practice

 

Its for pigs for which there is no limit or season for hunting because they are an invasive species. Sorry for your ignorance.

What you want requires a constitutional amendment. Good luck getting it.

 

A "reasonable accommodation" would involve mandatory 31 year prison sentences for any government official creating or maintaining a database of gun owners.

 

The banning of any "bearable arm" violates the constitution.

 

Let us know once you amend the Constitution.

 

You want to know my personal opinion? I have said it many times on this forum: If it were up to me, I would ban all guns. In a heartbeat. Allowing only for a very limited number of exceptions.

But it's not up to me. I know I'm in a very small minority. So I don't expect that to happen. And it's pointless to even propose it.

It's not possible. But what is possible is a reasonable effort to reduce the number of dead.

 

I agree it would be a great thing to reduce the number of dead. But I think in order to do that we need to understand why mass shootings are a thing now. What changed in the minds of Americans to behave this way? Why did we all of a sudden think nothing of walking into a school and start shooting innocent people?

 

We have to get to the root cause of the issue. The findings of which maybe EXTREMELY distressing to the left and why it is never brought up as a study. Blaming an inanimate object is nothing more than a pathetic attempt not to take a journey down "How did I F up" lane.

 

Joseph Walker played a significant part in America's history and every American should read his personal journals or at least his biogerphies.

 

He was definitely part of the history of the west especially in California. He doesn't get lots of press like other mountain men and explorers of the time but from what I've read about him he would want it that way. There is books to be found on him though and anyone interested in the history of California would find them interesting. This is a good one, informative and entertaining.

https://www.amazon.com/Westering-Man-Life-Joseph-Walker/dp/0806119349

 

I've already read it.

 

Get an amendment and you can ban whatever you want. Stop trying to convert my rights to privileges...

 

While you're at it, might as well ban magazine fed semi-auto handguns too as they can and have caused just as much carnage as 'assault' rifles have.

 

Like a tubular magazine fed semi-auto rifle ?


Why do you mention magazines since all firearms that hold more than one round has a magazine ?

On a M-1 Garand you insert a 8 round clip into the M-1 magazine.

On a lever action rifle the rounds are held in the tubular magazine.

On the M-14 that has a detachable 20 round magazine the magazine can be quickly topped off or completely reloaded without removing the magazine by using stripper clips.

AR's you have to remove the magazine to reload the magazine because they use a AarmaLite action. But stripper clips can be used to quickly reload the magazine once removed

All bolt action rifles have magazines.

On a revolver the cylinder is the magazine.


Meet the clip.





Meet the M-1 Garand clip




Reloading the magazine on a M-1A (civilian version of the M-14) without removing the magazine quickly without removing the magazine.

 

That's one man's opinion. I currently use a 9mm for home defense. When I get too old to safely shoot it, I'm buying an AR (should they still be legal). If ARs had been developed as well as they are today, I would have bought one when I was single (had more disposable income). An AR in .223 is actually a much safer home defense weapon than either a shotgun or your .357. When loaded with the appropriate frangible ammunition, it penetrates less layers of sheetrock (read interior walls) than does either a shotgun (with buckshot) or a .357. A .357 is probably the worst choice, as it will penetrate the most sheetrock of the three. Most guns with shoulder stocks are easier to shoot than most pistols.

It's a matter of preference and priorities.

https://www.ballisticmag.com/2015/08/28/8-experts-pick-their-home-defense-weapon-of-choice/
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/5/26/the-ar-for-home-defense-one-experts-opinion

For hunting, it's a similar thing, a matter of preference. Locally, in Florida, an AR in .223 is just about an ideal deer gun We have small deer here.

http://time.com/4390506/gun-control-ar-15-semiautomatic-rifles/
http://www.gameandfishmag.com/guns-shooting/10-best-hunting-ars/
http://ar15hunter.com/
http://www.guns.com/2017/11/17/why-hunters-are-trading-in-traditional-hunting-rifles-for-the-ar-15/

 

They actually caused the most carnage in school shooting since 1982. per the Mother jones study.

 

Depends on the ammunition chosen for both guns. Ironically, if you use the most effective self defense ammo (frangible, meaning soft points) for the AR, they are safer for your family. Why? The frangible .223 almost blows up on the sheet rock, and doesn't penetrate more than 3 or 4 layers. A 12-gauge with buckshot will penetrate 5 or 6 layers.
http://how-i-did-it.org/drywall/results.html

 

Yep he's so dumb he's sitting in the oval office beating the smartest person to ever run for the office, funny that.

 

Why not a Ruger Mini-14 ?



Specifications
Weight 6 lb 6oz (2.90 kg)
Length 37.25 in (946 mm)
Barrel length

• 22.00 in (559 mm) (Target Rifle)
• 18.50 in (470 mm) (Ranch Rifle)

Cartridge

• .223 Remington/5.56×45mm

Everyone who knows me know I haven't been a big a big fan of AR's since 1969 when they took away my M-14 and forced a M-16A1 on me.

I suppose I'm old schooled.

I prefer cold hard forged steel that has been milled, not stamped steel sheet metal that are used on AR's.

I also don't like AR's ArmaLite action that uses a gas tube instead of a gas piston that operates the cycling of the action.

M-1 Garands, M-14's and Ruger Mini-14's all use a gas piston.

From what I understand the current M-16's, M-4's and most AR's with continues use only have a life span of 30 years.

Where as rifles like the M-1 Garand, M-14, Mini-14s will still be shooting after a hundred years of use.

I own a M-1 Garand that's 74 years old and it still shoots, never had a stoppage and when I have the correct dope on the rear sight, I can hit 14" X 22" target from 1,000 yards.

I own a really old 45-70 Remington Rolling Block rifle made in 1878 and it still shoots.

Cold hard forged milled steel, the only way to go. Your grand children will thank you if we still have a Second Amendment.

 

9MM upper with an AR lower.

 

If a magazine has to be reloaded via a stipper clip, that action takes considerable more time than the "press and slap in a new 30 round mag" that detachables do.

 

There's a lot to be said for that.

A revolver can do anything a semi-auto can do in terms of targets or self defense...

 

You can hunt pigs with a 30/30 winchester just as well. And if you don't feel safe...carry a revolver.

The ignorance is your own

 

Ah but we come back to my right trumping your feelings. Or that the 2a is not about hunting.