The Gun Law Discussion

[SiempreTuna]

We do still have a chance because the majority of our military would never follow orders to turn against the people

Of course, the whole idea of a bunch of big bellies, pulling on camo, smearing their mascara and fighting a valiant resistance to save the US from an evil government is completely fatuous.

Equally, the whole evil-US-government turning on it's citizens is beyond absurd.

However, allowing for just one second that there might be any ever so remote possibility of anything of the like happening - which there isn't - it would almost certainly come in the form of a military coupe.

So yes, the military would fight and no, you wouldn't have a chance.

Somebody's been watching way too many sci-fi movies.

And the UN trying anything against us...

Why on earth would an organisation specifically set up to stop wars, start a war on the US?

WTF?

What is it with the right wing? To defend a patently ridiculous policy, they set up an even more ridiculous and totally impossible scenario that they then claim their policy would prevent.

It's like that old joke:

- Why do you have that 50 foot scarecrow in your garden?

- To scare away dinosaurs

- But .. there are no dinosaurs ..

- See how well it works?

 

[ElasticNinja]

And the UN trying anything against us... :laugh::rofl:

Why would the UN do anything? It is just an intergovernmental forum, which the US who set it up fails to fund properly.

 

[Speed Daemon]

We do still have a chance because the majority of our military would never follow orders to turn against the people.

That's one heckuva "if" to bet your life on! Even more so for those who have read history and know of countless pogroms with militaries firing on its own citizens.

And the Patriot Act and NDAA are terrible and extreme violations of several of our rights. Just because we lost those doesn't mean we should be willing to lose them all.

Of course we shouldn't lose more liberty. But that wasn't my point. Let's not counter falsehood with more falsehood.

REASONABLE: "Does banning certain types of firearms altogether, and banning necessary components of others violate the word and/or spirit of 'shall not be infringed'?"

NOT REASONABLE: "American civilians carrying nothing but small arms stand a real chance of winning an insurrection against the US military today, but won't if the bans are enacted."

Clear enough?

 

[chrlswltrs]

Everyone need to watch this. A few from overseas have chimed in trying to convince us the right thing to do is give up our guns. Here is the truth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9ZvwPmjJu4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

And once we lose our rights we will never get them back. We need to contact our politicians and make sure they do the right thing and follow the constitution. I already do this and am extremely thankful for Senators like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, WA state Senators have proven they are a disgrace to America and this state. And, I am very thankful for the overwhelming majority of sheriffs who are standing up and saying they will not enforce unconstitutional laws.

 

[ItnStln511]

Sntaylor, I'm just curious. Why are you, someone who doesn't even live in this country, arguing so hard that we should give up our rights? Is it because you don't have the same right to defend yourself?

Also, there is no way to measure how many crimes are prevented because criminals don't know who is armed due to conceal carry laws. We do know several things though:
-The 2 cities in America that have the strictest gun laws, Chicago and Washington DC, are the 2 most violent cities in America.
-The areas with the highest gun ownership per capita have the lowest crime rates.
-25 states in America do not require any type of permit to carry a concealed weapon, 4 out of 5 murders take place in the other 25 states.
-The Supreme court has ruled that it is an individual right to carry a firearm away from a person's home for self defense.

I'm curious too. The gun laws here don't affect him. And you're right, DC is pretty violent.

No it was not given to us by the government. The Bill of Rights was a list of basic rights (speech, religion, protection, property, due process) that every person has, and can not be taken away by the government. Since the time it was written the government has slowly taken away many of those through things like the NDAA, NFA, etc. The second amendment is the one thing that stops them from completely removing all of our rights, rounding up anyone that disagrees with them, and getting away with anything they want. The government is going to continually take away as many rights as they can get away with until they have total power and control and no way for anyone to resist oppression.

What's next? The left wants to take away my freedom of speech and religion?

 

[ItnStln511]

Most gun owners have common sense.

Perhaps the media should be showing this, instead of making it seem like all gun owners are psychos.

It's a little different over here in the states. CNN is mostly anti-gun, so I view anything they publish with suspicion.

In my area, there is a major city, Baltimore. In Baltimore, they found that 89% of gun violence incidents were committed by persons with at least 1 prior felony. Which means that they were disqualified for gun ownership at the time they committed the crime with a gun. So they had an illegal firearm. How, exactly, is a stick going to protect me against an assailant with a gun? The criminal has already proven that they do not regard the gun bans. Banning guns will only put the firearms in the hands of the criminal element and the government. Which the government isn't trusted by a vast majority of the citizens, anyhow.

Firearm ownership is very deeply engrained into American culture. Ever since Lexington and Concord, it has been a staple of our freedom. We would probably have lost our independence in 1812 had it not been for the militias in Maryland. Those were farmers and other citizens who maintained personal arms. Granted, we don't have to really fear of another British invasion, but the Chinese and Russians are growing ever restless and distrusting of us. And then, as I said, the US Government isn't always looking out for our best interests, either.

Perhaps this is why the British are wanting a gun ban in America?

And you're right on about Baltimore.

 

[ItnStln511]

Hopefully this thread does not get out of hand like the other one did. Before the other thread was closed there was a very good question asked about what the difference is between a civilian AR15 and the military M16. Since many people, especially the media who spread bad information, incorrectly think the AR15 is a military weapon it is important to know the difference.

First, AR does not stand for "assult rifle" it was named AR because it was developed by the Armalight Rifle Corp. The AR15 is a semi auto. The M16 is a select fire assault rifle. On the AR15 there is a switch on the side with 2 positions, fire and safe. The M16 has a 3 position switch with single shot (semi auto), burst (3 shots instead of 1) and full auto.

They use the same ammo, magazines, buffer tubes, grips, stock, etc. Everything inside is different though. The trigger group (multiple small pieces that are all of the moving parts in the lower receiver) has several different pieces that are machined differently and it is a felony to put an M16 trigger group in an AR15 if you could even find the right pieces. The upper portion contains the bolt carrier group and is different also. Basically on the outside they look the same but internally they are completely different weapons other than they shoot the same ammo. That even isn't entirely true. Some AR15's can not handle the higher pressure of the 5.56 NATO round and must shoot the .223 Remington round. They look almost identical but a 5.56 round will damage an AR15 if it is not properly chambered to handle the higher pressure.

Outside the guns look almost identical and they feel very similar. The reason each rifle is chosen is because of its reliability, ease of use, versatility, and easy to add accessories. Inside they are very different and operate differently.

Thanks for explaining that!

or in other words........... the AR15 is basically a .22 sqirrel rifle with a different skin

most people dont even know what size round an AR15 uses......... its just a costume to make it look like a badass gun..... just like those old plastic toys that looked like an M60 and had the pull slide that made a vibrating sound to immitate firing werent an assaut weapon........ neither is an AR15 which fires a round essentially the same caliber as the most common gun recommended for beginners

you do realize a .22 (squirrrel rifle) is less than a pubic hair smaller than a .223 (an ar15)?

as for the other thread sorry earlymon...... try rereading your timeline and fix it tomorrow before someone needs to fix it for ya........ you clearly were aloof and acted inappropriately

if you need help on that feel free to PM I will guide you through it...... hate to see the good ones go

Wow, I didn't know that the AR15 round was only slightly larger than a .22.

 

[septembersrain]

Most of the people who commit crimes work guns, obtained the gun illegally or from a family member.

Not all but the percentage is enough that people should not be pointing fingers at those of us who are responsible gun owners.

 

[copestag]

Thanks for explaining that!







Wow, I didn't know that the AR15 round was only slightly larger than a .22.

well to be exact...... some AR15s ARE .22s though the majority sold / favorite version is a .223

and to be more exact..... its so close a .223 AR15 can chamber and fire a .22LR round with a simple insert....... which is what I would imagine a great many owners do....... since .223 ammo is a heck of a lot more expensive than .22LR ammo

 

[chrlswltrs]

well to be exact...... some AR15s ARE .22s though the majority sold / favorite version is a .223

and to be more exact..... its so close a .223 AR15 can chamber and fire a .22LR round with a simple insert....... which is what I would imagine a great many owners do....... since .223 ammo is a heck of a lot more expensive than .22LR ammo

Technically you are correct, but I don't know anyone that would stick a 22LR round in a standard AR15. If the gun did fire, it would only fire once, then be jammed and have a stuck shell. Actually i don't know anyone that would ever use a round in any gun that the gun was not designed for it. The bullet is basically the same diameter, the cartridge is much larger on a .223 round though. You can simply swap the AR15 "upper" for one that is chambered for a 22LR, then there will be different magazines to use also.

 

[chrlswltrs]

Perhaps the media should be showing this, instead of making it seem like all gun owners are psychos.

Since when does the media show both sides of a story, especially when one side goes against this administrations agenda? They can't show any of the other side because it disproves every single point they try to brainwash the public with.

 

[copestag]

Technically you are correct, but I don't know anyone that would stick a 22LR round in a standard AR15. If the gun did fire, it would only fire once, then be jammed and have a stuck shell. Actually i don't know anyone that would ever use a round in any gun that the gun was not designed for it. The bullet is basically the same diameter, the cartridge is much larger on a .223 round though. You can simply swap the AR15 "upper" for one that is chambered for a 22LR, then there will be different magazines to use also.

yes the "insert" being a new bolt/chamber modification designed for .22LR... which is $150-$200 at any gun store.. and only takes a few seconds to install for even a novice... 1 day at the range more than covers it in the price difference for ammo...... and most kits include a magazine for this purpose....... and before the alarmists get in a panic....... its a legal modification

of course as I said........ many AR15s are designed for the .22LR.... just the .223 seems to be the preferred variant..... of course thats due to the fact that the round has more power because of the larger cartridge

once you buy the kit its easy to switch back and forth on a whim to suit your desires...... so you can use .22LR at the range and for shootin sqirrels in the woods..... and you can use the .223 for whatever you like, home defense etc

the opposite however is not true...... you cannot modify a .22LR AR15 to fire a .223.... the bullet diameter is actually slightly different 5.55mm vs 5.56mm (a pubic hair is enough to destroy a weapon)

in the grand scheme of things though....... the finer details dont really matter...... the long and the short of it is the AR15 is a sqirrel gun with fancy clothes

it just looks scarey so the alarmists pick on it

 

[ItnStln511]

Most of the people who commit crimes work guns, obtained the gun illegally or from a family member.

Not all but the percentage is enough that people should not be pointing fingers at those of us who are responsible gun owners.

Exactly!

 

[ItnStln511]

well to be exact...... some AR15s ARE .22s though the majority sold / favorite version is a .223

and to be more exact..... its so close a .223 AR15 can chamber and fire a .22LR round with a simple insert....... which is what I would imagine a great many owners do....... since .223 ammo is a heck of a lot more expensive than .22LR ammo

Interesting. I learn something new every day!

Since when does the media show both sides of a story, especially when one side goes against this administrations agenda? They can't show any of the other side because it disproves every single point they try to brainwash the public with.

Yeah, no kidding there!

 

[JohnLaird]

yes the "insert" being a new bolt/chamber modification designed for .22LR... which is $150-$200 at any gun store.. and only takes a few seconds to install for even a novice... 1 day at the range more than covers it in the price difference for ammo...... and most kits include a magazine for this purpose....... and before the alarmists get in a panic....... its a legal modification

of course as I said........ many AR15s are designed for the .22LR.... just the .223 seems to be the preferred variant..... of course thats due to the fact that the round has more power because of the larger cartridge

once you buy the kit its easy to switch back and forth on a whim to suit your desires...... so you can use .22LR at the range and for shootin sqirrels in the woods..... and you can use the .223 for whatever you like, home defense etc

the opposite however is not true...... you cannot modify a .22LR AR15 to fire a .223.... the bullet diameter is actually slightly different 5.55mm vs 5.56mm (a pubic hair is enough to destroy a weapon)

in the grand scheme of things though....... the finer details dont really matter...... the long and the short of it is the AR15 is a sqirrel gun with fancy clothes

it just looks scarey so the alarmists pick on it

By "insert" you mean an upper receiver group?

It's not really a kit...you just pull the two pins in the lower receiver and drop in the upper you want...install the correct recoil buffer in the stock and insert a magazine block. You can do that for .22RL, 9mm and 45acp, 6.5 grendel, .50 beowoulf, .300 whisper...although I think they just use a blowback action rather than direct gas for the pistol variants.

And yes...a squirrel gun that can hit human size targets at >600 yards with a good shooter, good ammo and and a scope that costs as much of the rifle.

 

[SiempreTuna]

Wow, I didn't know that the AR15 round was only slightly larger than a .22.

Err .. no. It ain't all about the diameter of the round.

This:

Is hardly the same as this:

The 'squirrel gun', .22 Long bullet is typically 20 to 60 grains and typically travels at 575 to 1,750 ft/s.

The .223 Remington is 40 to 90 grains and typically travels at around 3,750 ft/s.

So the .223 is up to 4.5 times heavier and travels 2 to 6 times as fast. The kinetic energy (='killing power') is of a totally different order.

They can't show any of the other side because it disproves every single point they try to brainwash the public with.

Except that it doesn't. The media may ignore claims that an AR15 is a squirrel gun, but that would be because it's complete bollix.

 

[copestag]

haha..... you edited your post to remove the garbage just as I was calling you out on it

btw I like that you chose wiki for your sources (note they have no source) ..... but the nice part is they do show a good picture there....... youll notice the much larger round on the right....... that comes from another hunting rifle...... the most popular deer rifle ...... and can be fired in as high numbers and speed as any AR15...... a scarey looking squirrel gun

 

[chrlswltrs]

Except that it doesn't. The media may ignore claims that an AR15 is a squirrel gun, but that would be because it's complete bollix.

What I was referring to (just for the gun debate) is things like:
-The AR15 is low power compared to most other rifles
-2.5 million Americans use a gun in self defense every year
-Chicago has the toughest gun laws and highest murder rate
-More people are killed by hammers than guns every year
-In the last 50 years only 1 mass shooting has taken place outside of a "gun free zone"
-A gun can not fire without someone pulling the trigger, people are the problem not guns
-VP Biden advises people to break the law and be stupid with guns (blast a shotgun into the air and shoot through doors...)


Those are just some of the examples of media bias on the gun issue. I could literally type for hours about their bias about other things.

 

[SiempreTuna]

haha..... you edited your post to remove the garbage just as I was calling you out on it

btw I like that you chose wiki for your sources (note they have no source)

Can't get to gun sites from work, but I don't think the claims in the articles I cited are particularly contentious: the numbers may not be spot on, but they're close enough to make the point. If you can find evidence that the .22 Long is as powerful as the .223 Remington, please share it.

While you're at it, why not give us a map to El Dorado and the secret to cold fusion ..

but the nice part is they do show a good picture there....... youll notice the much larger round on the right....... that comes from another hunting rifle...... the most popular deer rifle ...... and can be fired in as high numbers and speed as any AR15...... a scarey looking squirrel gun

I wasn't claiming the AR15 was the only deadly weapon around, just that describing it as squirrel gun because it's (completely different) round happens to be a similar bore is a ridiculous distortion.

I may not know much about guns, but even I can call bollix on that one

What I was referring to (just for the gun debate) is things like:
-The AR15 is low power compared to most other rifles
-2.5 million Americans use a gun in self defense every year
-Chicago has the toughest gun laws and highest murder rate
-More people are killed by hammers than guns every year
-In the last 50 years only 1 mass shooting has taken place outside of a "gun free zone"
-A gun can not fire without someone pulling the trigger, people are the problem not guns
-VP Biden advises people to break the law and be stupid with guns (blast a shotgun into the air and shoot through doors...)

I think most of these points have been addressed earlier in the discussion, so I won't bother repeating the arguments, but I can't resist pointing out that you may just be ignoring cause and effect when you say that Chicago has the toughest gun laws and highest murder rate, i.e. maybe it has the toughest gun laws BECAUSE it has the highest murder rate?

 

[Speed Daemon]

Ahem...

As entertaining it has been to read all about how a .22 rim fire cartridge is about as different as you can get from a .223 Remington, I don't see how any of this relates to the topic at hand.

I do enjoy discussing the finer points of various guns & ammo, but this isn't the place for it. Please consider starting a new thread devoted to different ammo types, right next to the "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" topic. Thank you.

 

[copestag]

thanks for your off topic clarification of what the topic is supposed to be...... durp

of course that avenue of discussion...... being completely on topic..... still leaves many aloof as to what an AR-15 is

a scarey looking squirrel gun

as for the topic portion of it....... wait for it...... connect the dots...... oh youre trying to ban squirrel guns.... tada

of course I guess as our 'leaders' have pointed out...... I should be ashamed of myself for forgetting the children while trying to maintain my own rights

 

[chrlswltrs]

of course I guess as our 'leaders' have pointed out...... I should be ashamed of myself for forgetting the children while trying to maintain my own rights

The liberals are the ones that repeatedly prove they don't care about the children. Why are our children less important that actors, politicians, banks, money, etc??? I care about my daughter, that is why I teach her the truth about guns. I care about my family that is why I have guns.

 

[SiempreTuna]

The liberals are the ones that repeatedly prove they don't care about the children. Why are our children less important that actors, politicians, banks, money, etc??? I care about my daughter, that is why I teach her the truth about guns. I care about my family that is why I have guns.

Wow! Talk about getting everything arse about face!

You're perfectly happy that nothing is done to prevent future tragedies where kids are killed, yet somehow you claim your objection shows you care about children?

That's some twisted thinking, dude!

And FYI: you're kidding no-one.

EDIT: re-phrased the sentence in the middle as it appears it was open to mis-interpretation.

 

[chrlswltrs]

Wow! Talk about getting everything arse about face!

You're perfectly happy that nothing is done to prevent future tragedies where kids are killed, yet somehow you claim your objection shows you care about children?

That's some twisted thinking, dude!

And FYI: you're kidding no-one.

EDIT: re-phrased the sentence in the middle as it appears it was open to mis-interpretation.

Absolutely not! Liberals think politicians, actors, banks, money, jewelry, etc are all more important than our children. That is why all of those people and things are protected while our children are left defenseless to lunatics. We should be protecting our children with more than a sign!!!

I want something done that both is effective and and doesn't infringe on the rights of law abiding citizens. Gun or magazine bans or increased background checks will only infringe on rights, not help anything.

 

[pbf98]

-VP Biden advises people to break the law and be stupid with guns (blast a shotgun into the air and shoot through doors...)

I am glad I'm not the only one that noticed this!