Yep!!
Yep!!
The only thing that is going to convince the anti's and "luke warm" gun owners that evil black rifles with high cap magazines are necessary is for them to NEED one and to NEED IT BADLY. When they are waiting on the police to show up when they are being beaten by several home invaders they will understand at that point. Same thing with liberals and spending. Once economic meltdown is achieved they will get the memo. The gun issue is really no different, some people are just too convinced that they are smarter than anyone else and have it figured out.
I challenge them one and all to give me specific measures that would prevent mass shootings/ violent crimes. They can't. They cannot reply to a reasonable debate/ challenge to their unreasonable beliefs. i then try and point them to the real issue we should be discussing: School Safety. Hasn't seemed to work. I wish if they just wanna ban guns the would have the backbone to say so and not try and use this tragedy to infringe upon my rights.
ps it kinda pisses them off when they can't tell you how a gun/mgazine ban would make anyone safer.
ps it kinda pisses them off when they can't tell you how a gun/mgazine ban would make anyone safer.
This whole post makes me angry.
The Vietcong and middle eastern insurgents have done quit well against them.
How about "to preserve our 1st amendment rights". Maybe that will make more since to some.
Perhaps I need to forward the dozen or so deer pics that have been taken with an AR?
Just expand on the social unrest scenario by asking questions. Make it real - What did the police do in the LA riots? What saved the Korean shop owners? What do you think would happen in major cities if welfare payments stopped? What happens after a natural disaster like a hurricane? If the police aren't around to stop the criminals, what kind of firearm would you want? Which neighborhood would be safer in a social unrest scenario - the one where some residents have bolt action rifles that hold 5 rounds or the one where some residents have semi-automatic rifles with high capacity magazines?
I had a family member ask me this very question today. Why do you need a 30 round mag? I told him that the 2A doesnt say that I have the right to bear arms as long as I'm registered with the state or I don't have any high cap mags. Then I asked him if he remembered a guy who killed 168 people with a truck and some fertilizer? Then I asked if he had heard of the guy in China that walked in and killed a bunch of people with a knife the other day? If a person wants to kill lots of people, they are going to find a way, it has absolutely nothing to do with guns! He didn't have much to say after that.
Funny, as I was reading through this thread I was going to post "Ask Dennis what these rifles can do against the might of a military like the USA's."
My pop told me the Ak in the hands of Vietnamese farmers held off the USA's military until we gave up.
That is the answer I give to the "DO you really think your rifle will fight tyranny?"
also some others:
Founders only meant muskets! - Muskets were the paramount rifle technology of the time, same as what the militia had. Nothing in the 2A described arms.
So, what is the limit, do we let people have WMD's - This is a typical straw-man. How do they compare small arms (rifles & pistols) to WMD's?....absurd in its conception.
Why do we need high cap mags? - Self-defense against tyranny, multiple attackers, sport shooting.
Adam Lanza was not a criminal before the shooting, he had easy access - No, he wasn't a criminal but his psychopathy was known and his mother did not keep her guns inoperable & inaccessible to unauthorized users. Mother was just as responsible as her son.
Last edited:
