- 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: They aren't coming for your guns, right? (for the 8,432nd time)
Posted on 6/6/24 at 7:59 pm to bbvdd
Posted on 6/6/24 at 7:59 pm to bbvdd
quote:
“As weapons of war have become commonplace in America, so has the unfathomable carnage they wreak on our communities,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety.
Well now, John, you just admitted these so-called “weapons of war” are “commonplace in America”.
Consequently, under the “common use” test established in Heller, these weapons of war are protected under the 2A. Thank you.
quote:
The Heller court established the “common use” test to decide how a court should determine whether particular objects, or arms, should be protected by the Second Amendment. Specifically, do the arms being legislated or regulated constitute arms in “‘common use’... for lawful purposes like self-defense.”
1
Posted on 6/6/24 at 8:29 pm to LSUChamps03
there you go
quote:
“We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men.”
Posted on 6/6/24 at 9:18 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:I think the shift from them trying to erode rights slowly by trying to ban assault weapons first to outright banning everything that’s a gas operated semi is probably because of this stupid argument about nomenclature. Eventually they’re going to win if the argument is only about how they’re too stupid to know the right name for something. The only people that care are gun people and they aren’t trying to flip gun people.
You think this is a result of people being corrected on their misunderstanding about a particular firearm?
Posted on 6/6/24 at 10:12 pm to SneakyWaff1es
quote:
I think the shift from them trying to erode rights slowly by trying to ban assault weapons first to outright banning everything that’s a gas operated semi is probably because of this stupid argument about nomenclature.
OK.
Well, you're wrong. This isn't new.
quote:
Eventually they’re going to win if the argument is only about how they’re too stupid to know the right name for something.
They've been winning because Fudds have been more than happy to let them say stupid shite like "weapons of war." They know what they're doing.
Posted on 6/6/24 at 10:40 pm to upgrayedd
Damn shame they are going g
To destroy those old SXS.
To destroy those old SXS.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 7:15 am to bbvdd
If nothing else, this is congealing around the left's definition of their made up term, "assault weapon": They are for banning gas operated semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines. (Until they get those banned, then they will move on the next most popular category of weapon, rinse, repeat.)
Frankly, it is only a matter of time.
Frankly, it is only a matter of time.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 7:16 am to cgrand
Nick Freitas on YT
While the morons play word games, I ask that you all list to this short video. He explains this very well.
I will say as you go down the word game road, you have lost half of the argument. Wording is not what the second amendment is about. Yet it is how they plan to dismantle it.
FU to the people that think that I should not hold on to my firearms. Period.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 7:58 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Fudds have been more than happy to let them say stupid shite like "weapons of war." They know what they're doing
But saying these are not weapons of war, so you can't restrict them is an argument that only sways those who already know this. Your typical person just thinks pistol grips are for killing people so its basically a machine gun. They don't understand the true capabilities and differences. And the further you go down that rabbit hole trying to claim its different than a weapon of war, the more they solidify their stance that weapons of war are bad to own since you are trying so hard to differentiate. Whereas I believe the true argument is I don't care if it's a weapon of war, f**k your fear, it's my right. No need to sit and talk about how an auto sear is different from semi auto. It makes no difference to my rights.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 8:39 am to Jon A thon
quote:
But saying these are not weapons of war, so you can't restrict them is an argument that only sways those who already know this.
That argument isn't about swaying people. It's about eroding their position.
quote:
Whereas I believe the true argument is I don't care if it's a weapon of war, f**k your fear, it's my right.
No one says you can only make one point in an argument...
Posted on 6/7/24 at 9:02 am to bbvdd
Get rid of dumbocraps and crime would be non existent.
THOU SHALT NOT INFRINGE………
30 people die every day due to DUI.
108,000 fentanyl overdoses in 2022.
Black on black violence accounts for the majority of gun violence. When are we going to start having conversations about that?
THOU SHALT NOT INFRINGE………
30 people die every day due to DUI.
108,000 fentanyl overdoses in 2022.
Black on black violence accounts for the majority of gun violence. When are we going to start having conversations about that?
This post was edited on 6/7/24 at 9:11 am
Posted on 6/7/24 at 9:31 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Pretending an AR-15 is "for all reasonable purposes identical" to an M4 is wrong.
Another poster just said infantrymen don’t even use the burst or auto. They were shown it in boot camp but that’s it. If that’s the case, and soldiers just use the semiautomatic fire, then there is no functional difference.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 9:50 am to biglego
Yes I said that. I was a light infantryman and have a combat infantry badge.
Using burst or full auto is highly frowned upon. It ruins sight picture and wastes ammo. If you had a company running full auto in combat they could be red on ammo before the battle ended. Full auto on a thirty round mag means youre reloading in seconds and probably also wasted a shite ton of rounds just for few seconds of suppressive fire. When someone is reloading someone else has to be firing. The whole unit has to work together in synchronization of their return of fire to make ammo sing continuously for longer.
Special Ops are in their own realm and I am not speaking for those badasses.
Using burst or full auto is highly frowned upon. It ruins sight picture and wastes ammo. If you had a company running full auto in combat they could be red on ammo before the battle ended. Full auto on a thirty round mag means youre reloading in seconds and probably also wasted a shite ton of rounds just for few seconds of suppressive fire. When someone is reloading someone else has to be firing. The whole unit has to work together in synchronization of their return of fire to make ammo sing continuously for longer.
Special Ops are in their own realm and I am not speaking for those badasses.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 10:11 am to biglego
quote:
Another poster just said infantrymen don’t even use the burst or auto. They were shown it in boot camp but that’s it.
I'd bet that poster is talking out of their arse.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 11:54 am to jangalang
quote:
Yes I said that. I was a light infantryman and have a combat infantry badge. Using burst or full auto is highly frowned upon. It ruins sight picture and wastes ammo. If you had a company running full auto in combat they could be red on ammo before the battle ended. Full auto on a thirty round mag means youre reloading in seconds and probably also wasted a shite ton of rounds just for few seconds of suppressive fire. When someone is reloading someone else has to be firing. The whole unit has to work together in synchronization of their return of fire to make ammo sing continuously for longer.
So if it’s the semi that’s used, and an AR15 does that…there’s not a real world difference.
I’m fine with arguing an AR15 is not a weapon of war, bc it’s not. But I can also see how it could be considered a meaningless distinction.
And before y’all start fussing at me. I own three ARs and I’m
Not giving them up. I’m just saying, I understand what cgrand was saying.
This post was edited on 6/7/24 at 11:56 am
Posted on 6/7/24 at 12:04 pm to biglego
quote:
I understand what cgrand was saying.
I see where he's coming from as well, but the fact remains that politicians want to make them seem more dangerous by calling them weapons of war. The fact of the matter is that they just aren't.
I can not go buy an M4. Why? If I can buy an AR and it's a "weapon of war" why can't I buy an M4?
Posted on 6/7/24 at 12:12 pm to bbvdd
It's an election year.
Democrats couldn't pass this when Obama was in the White House and he controlled both houses of Congress including a filibuster proof majority in the Senate.
It's election year bullshite.
It actually drives gun sales.
Democrats couldn't pass this when Obama was in the White House and he controlled both houses of Congress including a filibuster proof majority in the Senate.
It's election year bullshite.
It actually drives gun sales.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 12:30 pm to biglego
It is in fact a weapon of war. A shotgun is too in urban warfare. Knifves are too so this is a lousy debate.
Gun control libs are moreso trying to portray the AR as the SAW machine gun while the 2A acts like its a .22.
People should just call it what it is.
Gun control libs are moreso trying to portray the AR as the SAW machine gun while the 2A acts like its a .22.
People should just call it what it is.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 12:35 pm to bbvdd
quote:
I can not go buy an M4. Why? If I can buy an AR and it's a "weapon of war" why can't I buy an M4?
Exactly, because no matter what military and civilian Fudds try to say, they aren't the same.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 12:36 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
You can buy an M4. I have one at the house.
Posted on 6/7/24 at 12:37 pm to jangalang
quote:Ban hammers! They're weapons of waaaarrrr!
It is in fact a weapon of war. A shotgun is too in urban warfare. Knifves are too so this is a lousy debate.
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News