Background checks don't infringe on 2nd amdt.

You are completely wrong and have presented no evidence to support your case.

 

Indeed you are not repeating yourself, you are completely changing your entire argument into something completely different. Not well suited is not the same thing as useless.

 

You were presented with a link to a military training manual demonstrating the proper use of a rifle in tight quarters. The fact you chose to ignore it is your fault.

Explain the actions of the prosecution in the Duke Lacrosse rape case.

 

I await your evidence to the contrary. All I have heard up to now is opinion. You all seem to think very highly of yourselves. LOL

 

Indeed it would not. Any such attempt at making firearms ownership, which is a constitutional right, contingent upon meeting arbitrary government mandated requirements, would be vigorously opposed on all fronts. There would be no "small step" in this supposed expansion.

Your proposal would never pass the strict scrutiny, or even the intermediate scrutiny standard.

 

and you liberals make it even harder for them to do so

the Democrat crap called the GCA of 1968 made pistols far more expensive. It was due to racist reasons Yuppie liberal whites didn't want poor inner-city blacks being able to buy what racist liberal whites called "Saturday night specials"

 

More opinion. You have yours and I have mine

 

And yet no claims are being made on my part about being some supposed expert, while simultaneously posting erroneous information that is not factual.

- - - Updated - - -

You made the claim that the AR-15 is useless for tight quarters. Then you claimed that you said it was not well suited for tight quarters. Neither of which has any factual basis. You cannot even present a single source of information to back up either statement.

- - - Updated - - -

The difference is that your opinion is all that you have, and absolutely nothing more. You cannot cite anything to even suggest your opinion is correct. In more accurate terms, you have absolutely nothing.

 

I gave an opinion. You are free to have a different opinion. You have presented no facts to back up your case. We are just supposed to accept your opinions. Please.....you must be kidding

 

I ran his statement by my nephew who is now a major in the first special forces group, Ft Lewis WA. former a captain in the rangers-he had two tours in Iraq engaged mostly in brutal house clearing operations. He came home between tours and I had him come to my office and I had filled up a box of stuff he might find useful. Randall and Chris Reeve combat knives, MOD and Benchmade automatic folding knives. LaGuna combat Tomahawks, and several of the best magazines you can own for a Beretta M9. So he took a Reeve Special forces knife, a MOD automatic folder and asked me if he could take the magazines for his Lt who carried a Beretta. I said sure-he said he liked his M4 better for house clearings due to the stopping power and it was easy to do so. He'd tuck the stock (set on its shortest position) Under his armpit and stabilized by the sling. that left his left hand free to push open doors-or in some cases lob a frag into a room. So in that case, a M4 was his choice for house clearings. Now his barrel was shorter than you can buy on an AR 15 without a SBR stamp but what I keep for that sort of work is a SIG AR 15 pistol with a 7" barrel and one of those "stabilizing braces. And I set it up the same way my nephew does save mine has a laser and a flash light and that rifle is set to put a bullet right on top the laser beam and in the center of the flashlight beam

 

Lets be clear .....your opinion is all YOU have. LOL

- - - Updated - - -

Again we are just supposed to take your word. Everyone on here is special forces. It really is hilarious

 

His opinion his correct, There are several people on this board whose expertise in this subject is obvious to the rest of us who know guns Bryan VA is clearly what he says he is-a prosecuting attorney as I once was. And Orlando Chuck is clearly an experienced USPSA shooter as I was. My best year-before the new classification system had me shoot 95% on five classifiers. Now that was a long time ago and I'd probably best be rated a Class A shooter in Open and maybe M in limited, But I know when people are knowledgeable about gun issues and I use the same handle all over the net and dozens of people know who I am and have vouched for that-as RON has seen when he posted on a board he's no longer able to post on

 

Everybody is double secret black ops delta force commandos. LOL. I could not care less. I will argue here with the best of you. LOL

 

when I first joined DP, a couple banned members-Thunder (Ron) included, constantly claimed I wasn't an attorney, etc. a guy who was on that board-a man who was later killed in a bike accident sent a PM to one of the mods saying I really was what I said I was. I then was a sponsor of that site and the owner knew my name because my check and my credit card were used and he obviously could figure out my name from that, One of the other administrators ran a google search on my name and confirmed what the now deceased poster had said and that same administrator noted that several times Ron saw that

he might not be honest enough to admit it

but the fact is, those of us who understand firearms are rather adept at ferreting out those who are lying about guns, and you are lying about guns

- - - Updated - - -

and that is why you continue to lose, You remind of Monty Python's black knight. You claim you only suffered a flesh wound while your legs are in a pile and your arms in another. and all you have left is to try to bleed on us

 

As I said I could care less of your opinions of me. Personal attacks are always used when your argument fails. I will continue to post at will. But feel free to ignore me. I will be reporting any violations of forum policy I see.

 

The difference is that evidence was presented showing that you are wrong in your claim about the AR-15 being useless in tight quarters. You were linked to a united states military training manual demonstrating how rifles can be used in tight quarters. If that is not good enough, the website youtube is filled with videos demonstrating the AR-15 being used in close quarters training situations.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=AR-15+close+quarters

What have you presented to demonstrate that the AR-15 is useless in tight quarters? The statement that police officers work in teams and carry handguns in addition to rifles.

 

my arguments on guns have never failed. that's why I have been a guest on the NRA satellite radio show and many times a guest on other radio shows,
I am an expert on these issues and I think what really bugs you is you know I am

 

I could care less if you are Wayne LaPierre himself. LOL

 

I suspect I know far more than Wayne LaPierre. Wayne isn't a nationally ranked shooter who has shot in 2 world championships or world cups. Wayne isn't a graduate of one of the finest universities in the world nor one of the top law schools in the USA. He knows far more about lobbying than I do but on constitutional theory, constitutional law or actually shooting skills, he's way behind me and many others

 

He should get a shotgun that way he doesn't have to go to the range anymore. Also make sure you don't give a woman a 9mm, the recoil is INSANE. /knee slap

 

Wrong again.

You cannot have an FFL item shipped directly to your house that you ordered online.

 

it can be shipped to you if you dont buy it from an FFL, intra-state

 

No, you can't.

 

guns can't be shipped intra-state for a private gun sale?

maybe not, but transfer through an FFL is not required for intra-state sales.

 

I'm not saying that it's not entirely possible, I mean you could potentially get someone to ship you a box of cocaine from Bolivia if you tried hard enough.

Also, it depends on the State. In California for example, private sales are required to go through an FFL...according to the law.

Of course, felons being felons are going to ignore those laws.