- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: what is the practical purpose of assault rifles?
Posted on 3/1/18 at 1:50 pm to Quinn225
Posted on 3/1/18 at 1:50 pm to Quinn225
quote:
Unless you're a KKK loving White Supremacist who thought it was won fair and square from the prior owners.
Don't like it? Think it's tyranny?
Rise up! Reform or overthrow these tyrants by force if necessary!
OH wait. That takes guns doesn't it
1
Posted on 3/1/18 at 2:05 pm to extremetigerfanatic
If it ever came to that, most military would switch sides in a second. They took an oath to protect the citizens of the US, to defend our freedoms. A tyrannical government would be their enemy in that instance.
Posted on 3/1/18 at 2:05 pm to extremetigerfanatic
quote:
OH wait. That takes guns doesn't it
Unless you have Mandela. He just inspired to people/majority to stand up to tyranny while blowing a few things up here and there.
Apartheid didn't end b/c blacks suddenly got AR15s Goober. Hell his example kind of contradicts the entire argument.
This is getting way off topic.
I was just explaining that White South African land owners who TOOK BY FORCE the land from blacks a century ago are probably NOT the best example of why armed citizens makes sense.
This post was edited on 3/1/18 at 2:08 pm
Posted on 3/1/18 at 2:07 pm to John Milner
To assault the government when they come for our guns. But we know you referring to a AR-15 which is not a assault rifle.
Posted on 3/1/18 at 2:10 pm to mikelbr
quote:
I was just explaining that White South African land owners who TOOK BY FORCE the land from blacks a century ago are probably NOT the best example of why armed citizens makes sense.
A good portion of that land was NOT taken by force. The Brits did come in and take by force, but the Dutch that proceeded them most definitely did not. They negotiated for that land which was not being used as agricultural land before that. Read up on the Boers.
Posted on 3/1/18 at 7:40 pm to extremetigerfanatic
quote:
You are making a very big assumption that those men in uniform are going to use those weapons against their own people.
It's not an assumption. It's history. It's happened multiple times in the 20th century.
Page 21 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News