- Sep 12, 2014
- 24,962
- 21,784
What logical reason do you have for owning an ar-15 other than "i like it"?
Florida School Shooting, Over 20 Casualties
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by americangenius,
- Start date
The major hurdle in the way of gun law reform is NOT NOT NOT people on the left who are making emotional arguments
And if people who lack knowledge of the inner workings of a gun should be barred from the discussion, so should people who ignore the country's political climate
And if people who lack knowledge of the inner workings of a gun should be barred from the discussion, so should people who ignore the country's political climate
- Feb 22, 2013
- 10,249
- 6,648
what other reason do i need? i also have 2 cellphones. a desktop and a laptop. God willing I'll buy my second car this year. All things that i have for no other reason than "cuz i want to." but. let me guess. "those arent designed to KILL people!" i have a katana from back when i was in kung fu as well. cuz i want to.
let me take a further guess, u dont think i should have my AR, cuz you dont like it? or do u think MY AR is a danger to society?
- Feb 22, 2013
- 10,249
- 6,648
emotional arguments are DEFINITELY hurting reform. the major hurdle is finding middle ground with the far right. cuz REFORM is something the majority of america already agrees with, gun owners included.
You need to realize that you are a rare breed
There are a whole hell of a lot of gun owners who don't agree with your approach who see ANY change as an infringement on their liberties
And the politicians who represent their interests have to cater to their will
- Sep 12, 2014
- 24,962
- 21,784
You basically proved my point.
You're putting your selfish desires ahead of the betterment of society.
why are fully automatic weapons illegal? Why can't anyone that likes them own one?
- Feb 22, 2013
- 10,249
- 6,648
basically proved ur point as in u dont really have a rebuttal. fully auto weapons are "illegal" because they were used explicitly against police and overpowered them. full auto is also solely for flat out assault and causing as much destruction as possible. its also incredible inaccurate as even soldiers will tell you shooting their guns full auto doesnt happen much outside of goofing around. i also put "illegal" in quotations cuz there are legal ways to own it that dont require grey areas or loopholes. if you want to go thru the tedious process of legally owning one, then go ahead.
but they were "banned" to pacify the people who thought it would stop bank robberies, shootouts with police... etc etc. didnt really stop it.
theyre called the far right. hence why i said theyre the obstacle. but recent polls showed 97% in favor of universal background checks. which is a great start. are there owners who dont want any changes? yes. but they far from represent the majority of gun owners. you may see the nutjobs all over twitter and facebook on some MERICA! steeze but the dummies are always the loudest. REFORM, and REGULATION are overwhelmingly supported in the community.
Not just the far right, the right in general
Only around 20% of gun owners in the US lean to the left with close to 50% being on the right
So if they really want change, they have the numbers to put that pressure on their elected officials
I don't see it happening
- Oct 13, 2001
- 161,850
- 144,289
tekthemaestro
Respect for sharing knowledge, keeping a level-head, and providing solutions in this thread.
I see you man
- Jan 16, 2011
- 15,125
- 36,857
Not happening. The far right is more than willing to throw everybody under the bus. Just look at how fast they blamed the blue line folks. They didn't even blink. If anything, they are the emotional children in the equation.
- Dec 3, 2007
- 8,184
- 5,415
The only armed sheriff on campus was seen "seeking cover behind a concrete column" while Cruz was murdering kids on campus.
Smh.
...
Smh.
...
- Feb 22, 2013
- 10,249
- 6,648
theyre irrational children. but typically emotion-less tbh. they parade the constitution around as an excuse for why things shouldnt change but turn right around and infringe on everyone elses constitutional rights under the name of safety. thats the kind of person you have to get to agree with you. the only way to do it, is to find common ground that makes them feel like they still didnt lose. hence, a ban is flat out unrealistic in this current time and climate. gotta meet in the middle. keep your guns, but register em, become licensed for it (just like a hunter needs a license), undergo evaluation, and subject yourself to the new rules.
- Jan 16, 2011
- 15,125
- 36,857
Their idea of compromise is to give teachers guns.
How do you find a middle ground with people like that?
I was listening to this conservative personality (host of a TV and YouTube show) who said that he would be glad if shots were fired in a school by a "defensive person."
What? How do you determine who is a defensive person?
They just don't think beyond "give more people more guns."
- Feb 22, 2013
- 10,249
- 6,648
horrible idea. extremists who believe in "ARM EVERYBODY!" are the only ones who follow this logic. sensible people want to keep guns out of the wrong hands. stupid people think u can give a gun to everybody and somehow miss the wrong hands. teachers cant even break up fights without panicking. i dont need an untrained teacher trying to fumble with their gun to get control of a situation.
and if u need an example of why this wouldnt work, think of a jail. the reason guards dont walk around in the jail or prison with guns on them is cuz theyre outnumbered. its well known that prisoners could easily overpower guards if they wanted. which would result in some orange is the new black type of thing where now youve armed the prisoner. it would happen in a classroom way too easy. 5 kids gang up on a teacher outta nowhere and now theyre armed doing whatever they want. NOPE. horrible idea.
- Oct 7, 2007
- 7,600
- 7,482
It's usually a bad idea to give people in positions of authority more power.
Teacher = person in position of authority
Gun = power (in this case physical power)
Teacher + Gun = What the ****.
Teacher = person in position of authority
Gun = power (in this case physical power)
Teacher + Gun = What the ****.
superblytrife
Supporter
- Mar 20, 2002
- 21,103
- 22,974
- Sep 12, 2014
- 24,962
- 21,784
Arm the teachers 
NRA won
NRA won
- Apr 23, 2014
- 44,764
- 17,078
- Apr 23, 2014
- 44,764
- 17,078
It's like they think this thread is making a difference.
Liking each others posts, power in groups, ignoring the concerns of the other side or flat out not listening, name calling....wow, way to start the War on Guns.
Hey, but at least they leave the thread with their head held high "boy we sure got more reps than the other side today"
NBA back though, I can unwatch this circle-jerk.
Like, TEK was down for a decent discussion, and most of you didn't even realize it, you just called him a "Gun NUT" instead.
Fight on Freedom Fighters.
a-friend out
Liking each others posts, power in groups, ignoring the concerns of the other side or flat out not listening, name calling....wow, way to start the War on Guns.
Hey, but at least they leave the thread with their head held high "boy we sure got more reps than the other side today"
NBA back though, I can unwatch this circle-jerk.
Like, TEK was down for a decent discussion, and most of you didn't even realize it, you just called him a "Gun NUT" instead.
Fight on Freedom Fighters.
a-friend out
- Dec 27, 2014
- 35,607
- 78,302
- Dec 27, 2014
- 35,607
- 78,302
They're not illegal though. As long as it was made before the ban, you can legally purchase and own one as long as you pay $200 stamp tax to the ATF.
- Jan 12, 2013
- 26,990
- 38,693
I think part of the reason semi-auto assault rifles were outlawed here is because you can't really make much of a case for owning one. Even our gun lobby strongly supports that part of the legislation and we're the home of FN Herstal. Most of our most famous firearms are ironically illegal to own in this country such as the P90 and various FN rifles. If you really want to use an assault rifle you can fire them as much as you want at a shooting range. You can legally have one if you qualify for a special permit on top of a standard permit as a special forces unit in law enforcement or are enlisted in the military with infantry combat training. While self-defense is one of the legal reasons you can submit for getting a firearm permit, in your hearing before the provincial firearms council for your permit it can't be the sole reason you submit for ownership. It must be accompanied by an additional reason such as hunting or sports shooting. The law states that the kind of firearms available under standard permits are plenty sufficient for self-defense if necessary. That generally means break-action shotguns and rifles with a very limited ammo capacity. Generally a capacity of 1 to 2 bullets. If you want a handgun you can only get one through a sports shooting license and it can only carry a maximum of 5 bullets.
Even if those kind of semi-auto assault rifles were legal no self-respecting hunter I've ever met would use them nowadays. It would practically be cheating at hunting given that we only shoot with break-action firearms that can only fire once or twice before having to load new bullets in the chamber. Throughout the years you occasionally hear some stories about hunting with more advanced weaponry in other countries. Disgraceful to the art of hunting imo.
Different culture of course but I don't see any reason besides "because I want to and because I can" to own a semi-auto assault rifle. You're not gonna walk around with an AR in town to defend yourself when you can tuck a handgun into a concealed holster. And on your own private property a shotgun or a handgun would surely be sufficient for self-defense.
I'm not necessarily opposed to firearms in general, I owned 6 of them myself for a while, but I really don't think semi-auto assault weapons serve any reasonable purpose. I firmly support our laws requiring special permits on top of a standard firearm permit to own those kind of guns and the requirement of having some high ranking combat position in law enforcement or the military to get such a permit.
For the 99% who will never be able to even qualify for that kind of permit, everyone is welcome to give them a go at a shooting range. Even automatic weapons.
If there is sensible legislation and a healthy gun culture I don't have that much of a problem with guns. Personally I don't believe the US has either and most certainly not the latter. Switzerland is the most firmly pro-gun country in this part of the European continent and you never hear about mass shooting incidents there.
Since our 2006 gun law overhaul after a mass shooting incident we also started registering every subsequent firearm sale and gun ownership in a massive electronic database. As I found out for myself there's lots of information in there. My full name, address, phone number, complete information about every gun I've had including model, caliber and serial number, the dates when they were acquired, the location, previous owner and permit information. Frankly I'm not sure how they even got some of that information as one of the guns I found at my dad's home (a shotgun that can fold completely in half) was one I had never seen before and it turned out to have been outlawed since 2006. I was planning to turn it in anyway but the cops sent me a letter ordering to do so and listed the serial number on the gun.
Maybe a bit excessive but hey it certainly keeps track of firearms. There's loads of unregistered guns out there from pre-2006 but at least 200k of them were retroactively registered in 2006 if I recall correctly.
Overall I think the 2006 law certainly changed a lot. Prior to that you could buy practically any gun with very little restrictions. There was some opposition from the gun lobby at first but they're firm supporters of most of the legislation now including the database, restrictions to assault rifles of any kind and making the permit process much more strict. I'd say our gun lobby is pretty great really, especially nowadays. They mostly stick to updating citizens on any changes or potential changes to the legislation and how it affects gun owners. They don't appear to do much actual lobbying against specific policies, at least not publicly. Overall a well respected organization.
Edit: One of the other key policies that was added is that anyone over the age of 18 living in the same residence as the individual applying for a firearm permit has the right to block firearm applications. Not retroactively but they can block the renewal of an existing permit aside from blocking a brand new one. In every permit application, the default position of all co-inhabitants is listed as supportive of the permit application. Thus if there is no objection the process will continue as normally. However if any of the co-inhabitants submit any objection the process is shut down immediately until they no longer object or if they no longer reside in the same home. It's not necessarily just between family members, it applies to roommates as well. No reason behind the objection is required, a simple "I object" would suffice.
Even if those kind of semi-auto assault rifles were legal no self-respecting hunter I've ever met would use them nowadays. It would practically be cheating at hunting given that we only shoot with break-action firearms that can only fire once or twice before having to load new bullets in the chamber. Throughout the years you occasionally hear some stories about hunting with more advanced weaponry in other countries. Disgraceful to the art of hunting imo.
Different culture of course but I don't see any reason besides "because I want to and because I can" to own a semi-auto assault rifle. You're not gonna walk around with an AR in town to defend yourself when you can tuck a handgun into a concealed holster. And on your own private property a shotgun or a handgun would surely be sufficient for self-defense.
I'm not necessarily opposed to firearms in general, I owned 6 of them myself for a while, but I really don't think semi-auto assault weapons serve any reasonable purpose. I firmly support our laws requiring special permits on top of a standard firearm permit to own those kind of guns and the requirement of having some high ranking combat position in law enforcement or the military to get such a permit.
For the 99% who will never be able to even qualify for that kind of permit, everyone is welcome to give them a go at a shooting range. Even automatic weapons.
If there is sensible legislation and a healthy gun culture I don't have that much of a problem with guns. Personally I don't believe the US has either and most certainly not the latter. Switzerland is the most firmly pro-gun country in this part of the European continent and you never hear about mass shooting incidents there.
Since our 2006 gun law overhaul after a mass shooting incident we also started registering every subsequent firearm sale and gun ownership in a massive electronic database. As I found out for myself there's lots of information in there. My full name, address, phone number, complete information about every gun I've had including model, caliber and serial number, the dates when they were acquired, the location, previous owner and permit information. Frankly I'm not sure how they even got some of that information as one of the guns I found at my dad's home (a shotgun that can fold completely in half) was one I had never seen before and it turned out to have been outlawed since 2006. I was planning to turn it in anyway but the cops sent me a letter ordering to do so and listed the serial number on the gun.
Maybe a bit excessive but hey it certainly keeps track of firearms. There's loads of unregistered guns out there from pre-2006 but at least 200k of them were retroactively registered in 2006 if I recall correctly.
Overall I think the 2006 law certainly changed a lot. Prior to that you could buy practically any gun with very little restrictions. There was some opposition from the gun lobby at first but they're firm supporters of most of the legislation now including the database, restrictions to assault rifles of any kind and making the permit process much more strict. I'd say our gun lobby is pretty great really, especially nowadays. They mostly stick to updating citizens on any changes or potential changes to the legislation and how it affects gun owners. They don't appear to do much actual lobbying against specific policies, at least not publicly. Overall a well respected organization.
Edit: One of the other key policies that was added is that anyone over the age of 18 living in the same residence as the individual applying for a firearm permit has the right to block firearm applications. Not retroactively but they can block the renewal of an existing permit aside from blocking a brand new one. In every permit application, the default position of all co-inhabitants is listed as supportive of the permit application. Thus if there is no objection the process will continue as normally. However if any of the co-inhabitants submit any objection the process is shut down immediately until they no longer object or if they no longer reside in the same home. It's not necessarily just between family members, it applies to roommates as well. No reason behind the objection is required, a simple "I object" would suffice.
Last edited:
- Jul 17, 2017
- 1,239
- 583
That is a very intelligent post aside from the fact you have no idea what you're talking about as it relates to whatever the hell weaponry you are referencing ... A semi-automatic "assault rifle" is a conjured term ...
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,048
- 24,223
