Why Everyone Needs An AR-15

[HARK!]

Actually the reason He told them to buy swords was to fulfill the prophecy that they will be named among the transgressors.

See Post 194.

 

[HARK!]

I feel like the topic has been derailed by this discussion. What I would like to know is why people think that civilians shouldn’t own an AR? So far the reasons I’ve seen are

Now that you mention it, I agree. I'm going to declare hollow points and dum dum rounds, off topic from here on out.

 

[HARK!]

So who really NEEDS an AR-15 as a regular citizen? People who require AR-13s are either gangsters or paranoid people. Why can't you just blow someone away with a shotgun? Why is there a need for 30 rounds per multiple magazines unless you or your kids want to blow away a school full of children? Is it really that serious? Are you really in that much danger as a hard-working 9-5 person or is it more useful for cartels, gangs, a paranoid preppers?

I already mentioned wild pigs. Shall I continue; or is one reason not good enough for those who would attack my God given rights?

 

[HARK!]

This is why I said the AR-15 "was initially designed" for the military. It has since been redesigned for civilian use as you correctly stated.

Are you saying that the civilian version is not the same gun as the military version?

If so, why would that even matter?

 

[HARK!]

So who really NEEDS an AR-15 as a regular citizen?

Regular citizen?

Are you proposing a two class system; where some people have more God given rights than others?

 

[HARK!]

There are far superior rifles available for hunting and weapons available for self-defense.

Please name a few of the firearms that are superior for self defense; and explain why they are superior.

First and foremost, the AR-15 was designed to kill humans in the most efficient way possible.

 

[HARK!]

The designs of both the Browning Bar Mark III and the Benelli R1 make quick reloading difficult.

That's a drawback; but this thread is about the AR-15.

 

[HARK!]

Thinking that violence is necessary as a solution to violence is the sort of thinking that perpetuates violence through a lack of creative nonviolent engagement with the world. That is why I favor a Just Peace rather than Just War ethic. Because the emphasis is on peace rather than justifications for war and violence.

It will be wonderful when Messiah returns and exterminates the lawless. In the mean time God calls us to exterminate the murderers.

 

[HARK!]

I would hope I would be able to resolve those situations with minimal amount of violence, such as by seeking to de-escalate, flee or evade from the violent confrontation.

Many people were murdered, or attacked by feral pigs, who's hopes and dreams were shattered.

I like to hope for the best, and to prepare for the worst.

 

[FireDragon76]

Many people were murdered, or attacked by feral pigs, who's hopes and dreams were shattered.

I like to hope for the best, and to prepare for the worst.

This doesn't sound like a properly Christian attitude, to denigrate hoping and dreaming as vain.

 

[Tuur]

Many people were murdered, or attacked by feral pigs, who's hopes and dreams were shattered.

I like to hope for the best, and to prepare for the worst.

The point that seems to be lost is that self-defense is the last resort, not the first.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I don't dismiss the self-defense questions out of hand. It's not so much pacifism: Jesus has authority none of us has. But the question is should Christians use force, up to and including deadly force, to protect their lives and the lives of their family? I think there are instances of justifiable force, but what if I'm wrong?

I think it’s important to keep in mind that it’s not the victim who caused the situation and put the attacker in harms way. The attacker is the one who does that knowing what the consequences might be.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I don't like answering these kinds of hypotheticals, as they are a poor way of determining what is right and wrong. For one thing, such circumstances are rare (even in the US it's rare to be randomly attacked by anyone, it has never happened in all my 48 years of life and nobody I know has had it happen to them, either), and not good for deriving general ethical principles. Nevertheless, I would hope I would be able to resolve those situations with minimal amount of violence, such as by seeking to de-escalate, flee or evade from the violent confrontation.

Well ,that is always the best when possbile though in many states no longer required, but sometimes it is not and in those cases violence can be the only way to stop the threat or at least threatened violence that would be either banishing a weapon or even making it known you have a weapon. Again, in many if not most states now you do not HAVE to flee before using force, but when possbile it is always better(except if a person is at home I wouldd go ahead and say use force as that is your castle, but that is just me and I certainly would not judge someone who chose not to do that

 

[BNR32FAN]

So who really NEEDS an AR-15 as a regular citizen? People who require AR-13s are either gangsters or paranoid people. Why can't you just blow someone away with a shotgun? Why is there a need for 30 rounds per multiple magazines unless you or your kids want to blow away a school full of children? Is it really that serious? Are you really in that much danger as a hard-working 9-5 person or is it more useful for cartels, gangs, a paranoid preppers?

Maybe you’re thinking about a different environment than I am. An AR definitely wouldn’t be my choice for protection in a high populated area but in rural areas it’s a lot more beneficial. And you just answered your own question, gangsters and cartels have these weapons and they usually don’t work alone which is the whole reason for being in a gang in the first place. These people do rob houses. There are 2.5 million burglaries each year in the US. 7% of those resulted in violence which is 175,000 per year. And how many school shootings are committed with “assault rifles”? One every 10-15 years?!! 7500 homicides committed each year with handguns and 500 committed with rifles and that’s not only “assault rifles” that’s ALL rifles not including shotguns which is around 80 per year. So your logic is completely absurd that I should choose a weapon that has a maximum ammo capacity of 5 shots. So who’s being more paranoid, the person worried about one attacker every 10-15 years or the person whose worried about the person worrying about the 32,250,000 burglaries that take place in the same amount of time?

 

[BNR32FAN]

That's quite a leap. So you're saying that Yahshua was executed, because his followers were carrying swords?

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

No that’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying that Jesus specifically said why they should buy swords and it was to fulfill the prophecy that they would be numbered among the transgressors.

”And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘And He was numbered with transgressors’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.” They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.”“
‭‭Luke‬ ‭22‬:‭36‬-‭38‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

 

[BNR32FAN]

I already mentioned wild pigs. Shall I continue; or is one reason not good enough for those who would attack my God given rights?

The thing is people want to remove the AR from civilian’s hands because it’s the most efficient and effective weapon on the market and that’s their argument. Because it is the most efficient and effective weapon it shouldn’t be available to civilians. The problem with this line of reasoning is as long as any weapon is available for civilians there will always be one that is more efficient and effective than all the others. So then you have to get rid of that weapon then the next one and the next one, because these next most effective weapons are going to be the new choice for mass shooters. It’s a never ending argument that will be made over and over again until there’s nothing for civilians to protect themselves and their families. An argument that completely ignores the fact that there are over 20 million AR15s in circulation that have never killed anyone and probably never will.

 

[BNR32FAN]

High-capacity magazines have no place in our society either.

When do the restrictions stop? Where do we finally draw the line because if you remove 30 round magazines then they’ll have 20. And those will be the new preferred magazines for mass shootings. So then you get rid of those now we have 10 found magazines and those become the new preferred magazines for mass shooters so now we’re down to 5 and the problem keeps persisting until we aren’t allowed to have anything at all. These bans don’t solve the problem which is an extremely rare problem I might add.

 

[BNR32FAN]

And now we're back at the start. If I do get a 45-70, I'll own a lever action not much different than what some US troops carried in Cuba in the Spanish-American War. And a 12 gauge pump shotgun isn't much different than what US soldiers used in WWI and subsequent wars. I get that some are troubled by the "look" of an AR-15, but every type of firearm has been used by some military at some point. There's no escaping that. And if you go the archery route, there's the Battle of Agincourt to consider.

Yeah maybe if we put some wood components on it people will stop making such a big deal about it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

because not everyone is paceful for some people violence is all they understand.

And some people in this very country have absolutely no morals at all and are ruthless murderers who don’t care about anyone or the law. We see it everywhere everyday on the news. Too many people in this country expect everyone to live their life unprepared and unable toto do something to stop these kinds of people if they ever become a target. This kind of reminds me of a discussion I had with my wife when we had to move and were looking for another place to rent. She kept finding all these cheap places in Fort Worth and I told her over and over we’re not moving to Fort Worth because it’s a dangerous place to live. There are too many bad neighborhoods spread out all around Fort Worth. Even if you find a place in Fort Worth that isn’t in a bad neighborhood you’re never more than 5 minutes away from one. And she just kept on about how there were so many cheap places there until I finally said ok fine let’s go and take a look at them. So we drove to the place and it wasn’t a bad looking house and I told her ok I’m going to drive down the street and you look at every house we pass and tell me what they all have in common. So we drove two blocks and she said I don’t know they all look like nice houses and I said you didn’t notice that every single house for the last two blocks have bars on the windows and doors? Every single one. They don’t put those there for decoration. Then I asked have you ever seen one house in our neighborhood that has bars on the windows and doors and she said no and I said that’s why we live there.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I don't like answering these kinds of hypotheticals, as they are a poor way of determining what is right and wrong. For one thing, such circumstances are rare (even in the US it's rare to be randomly attacked by anyone, it has never happened in all my 48 years of life and nobody I know has had it happen to them, either), and not good for deriving general ethical principles. Nevertheless, I would hope I would be able to resolve those situations with minimal amount of violence, such as by seeking to de-escalate, flee or evade from the violent confrontation.

Would you agree that these attacks are at least 1000 times more common than attacks with “assault rifles” if not more?