Why Everyone Needs An AR-15

[timewerx]

This is why everyone should not have access to high powered weapons, in fact, no regular civilians should have access to semi or autos, as your deer or pheasant would taste more metallic. I do not own any firearms, cos I do not hunt. But if I did hunt, I would probably own a 0.22, meant for hunting only. These AR weapons are military grade bro. Alright, I'll step out of this thread before the NRA supporters attack.


Columbine, CO: April 20, 1999
View attachment 346329

Ever heard of mass stabbing incidents? Maybe we shouldn't have access to knives too?

Iceland have high gun ownership but far lower homicide rate that compared to USA. Mass shootings are unheard of in Iceland.

Guns and knives are not the problem but the American culture of espousing social inequality, bullying, and the love of money.

 

[Lost4words]

The following video walks through the history of advancements in long guns, from the hand cannon to the AR-15.

It details the importance of not endangering the weakest of our people, by forcing them to defend their own lives with "old," "clunky," "difficult to use," "relics."

Only in the USA!!!! Yikes!!!

 

[bèlla]

Harm can be interpreted by everyone differently. Be careful about lobbying for non access in things you don't agree with while expecting others to honor your choices. There are more people who believe religion is harmful than guns and if given the option to ban it they would. And if that happened you'd mention your rights, fairness, etc.

Religion is a choice just like gun ownership. A person's decision to abuse either doesn't make it bad. There's more scandals in the church than mass shootings. More people have bad experiences with Christians and churches than guns.

~bella

 

[dogs4thewin]

I believe that the "inalienable rights" of the Second Amendment have been interpreted much more narrowly in the first 200 years if our history.
Aggressive lobbying by the NRA, their funding university law school chairs of extremist professors, etc. have warped the original Second Amendment.

From 1775-1980, no one could have ever owned an AR15 or assault weapon, and that is how it should be.

The assault weapons ban lasted ten years has lapsed for twice that by now and with so many millions out there good luck rounding them up and some people will tell you even if you try ( those that are not on the black market it would get real violent real quick and some of the "good guys" military and police would not help and many people ( even if they do not own any would not rat. I remember and this is in a rural county in the south the sheriff one time ( who I do not like for a number of reasons, but anyway asks people to report weed they saw growing SEVERAL people told him plainly look it is illegal so if you find them arrest them, but I am not helping you. Now, even if G was gong to try something like that if people in this rural coumty will not report weed a usually liberal issue how many do you think would rat on people for having guns? Even though, it is well known you break-in in this county there is a good chance the coronor will be coming with the police as most households do own at least one gun and nothing is thought of gun shots with all the hurting and target practicing.

 

[PloverWing]

And if he wasn't? Self protection is self protection regardless of the predator. Yes, I know there are denominations that do not support self-defense. That, apparently, was why my family left one over two hundred years ago, so that's hardly a new issue. If that's your belief, far be from me to try to convince you otherwise. And yet this is right back at a person deciding whether or not they should defend themselves and whether or not to be armed. The contention is whether others should make that decision for us.

In Texas we can defend our lives against criminals too.

God Bless Texas!

So we are, at least in part, talking about using the weapons in the video to kill human beings.

1. The use of lethal violence in self-defense is a morally gray area. We balance the imperative of loving our neighbors (even if they are enemies) against the practical need to make moral compromises as we make our way through a broken world. I do not have an easy answer, and the church has not found a single, easy answer, despite centuries of debate.

Using one of those weapons on a human is pretty far into the morally-dark-grey zone, but I suppose I can allow that a reasonable person might sometimes make that choice, especially since:

2. We live in a multicultural, multi-religious society, where I live alongside people whose religious and philosophical beliefs are different from mine. I can't expect my neighbors to be Quakers.

This brings us to the civil society point:

3. Regardless of our religions and philosophies, here in the US we need to reduce the danger posed by widespread gun ownership. Truly, I don't know what the best remedy is. Options I've see suggested are: arm everyone; arm no one; require strict licensing and screening; or restrict the weapons that can be sold. I'd like to see more data, a better analysis of what works and doesn't work, empirically, to reduce violence. Until we understand better what make a gun owner cross the line from shooting targets to shooting humans, I don't think we really know what we're screening for.

I'll conclude with a couple of positive points I've seen from the gun owners in this discussion:

4. If you must own a gun, then (as @Tuur observed) thorough training and excellent discipline make a big difference, especially in reducing accidental injuries.

5. Returning to the OP, I agree that some of our gun laws are clumsily written. Evidence-based legislation (perhaps written by knowledgeable gun owners themselves?) would be better.

 

[Fantine]

A lot more funding of universities comes in from those who would like to see law abiding gun owners disarmed.

Every school shooter would have been called "a good guy with a gun" until he wasn't. It's not efficient to find out who shouldn't have a gun by waiting till they've shown their true colors.

 

[returntosender]

Here is the reality:

China teaching elementary school children how to use mortars​

And you see nothing wrong with this, coming from China? I'm outta here.

 

[AlexB23]

Ever heard of mass stabbing incidents? Maybe we shouldn't have access to knives too?

Iceland have high gun ownership but far lower homicide rate that compared to USA. Mass shootings are unheard of in Iceland.

Guns and knives are not the problem but the American culture of espousing social inequality, bullying, and the love of money.

Yeah, I have heard of mass stabbings, but you can potentially outrun a knife, not hundreds of Mach 2 bullets per minute. Yeah, Iceland knows what they are doing, and has a lower inequality rate compared to the US.

 

[returntosender]

I'm only concerned with the army of children you propose. I believe That's being done in other countries. The mentality and maturity of children has not been fully realized. Putting guns in mentally immature children is dangerous. I can still see the marching children with guns in Korea, shivers!

 

[dogs4thewin]

Every school shooter would have been called "a good guy with a gun" until he wasn't. It's not efficient to find out who shouldn't have a gun by waiting till they've shown their true colors.

Actually in the case of many though not all school shooters the person was too young to have a gun anyway.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Every school shooter would have been called "a good guy with a gun" until he wasn't. It's not efficient to find out who shouldn't have a gun by waiting till they've shown their true colors.

Also at this point with as many guns as peple and the huge black market it is not reasonable to remove all guns. Background checks are great, but as you implied require a traceable background. In other words, a background check will only find things that A already happened and B were some how documented either by the police, medical personal or something

 

[returntosender]

Actually in the case of many though not all school shooters the person was too young to have a gun anyway.

@dogs4 And they don't til it's too late

 

[returntosender]

Actually in the case of many though not all school shooters the person was too young to have a gun anyway.

@dogs4And they don't til it's too late

 

[BNR32FAN]

I have trouble picturing a morally acceptable use of any of the weapons on his table. If you live in an area like Alaska where you're occasionally attacked by polar bears, then okay. But I don't think that's what he has in mind. All of his video clips were about using the weapons on human beings.

Yeah that’s probably because human being kill about 20,000 people per year and in Jan 2023 a polar bear killed a mother and her child which is the first death by polar bears in the last 30 years.

 

[BNR32FAN]

This is why everyone should not have access to high powered weapons, in fact, no regular civilians should have access to semi or autos, as your deer or pheasant would taste more metallic. I do not own any firearms, cos I do not hunt. But if I did hunt, I would probably own a 0.22, meant for hunting only. These AR weapons are military grade bro. Alright, I'll step out of this thread before the NRA supporters attack.


Columbine, CO: April 20, 1999
View attachment 346329

Semi automatics don’t blast a bunch of ammo if you don’t pull the trigger. The advantage is that you can quickly get another shot off if you miss without having to take your eyes off the sights. When you’re shooting at a moving target at a long distance and your encountering any wind getting a kill shot on the first try is extremely lucky. Just because someone has a semi auto doesn’t mean they’re going to be filling their target with lead because every shot destroys the meat and wastes it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

An AR15 is nothing more than a semi-automatic rifle. It can take a large capacity magazine, but so
can other semi-auto rifles like a 308.

The main difference is that an AR15 is generally lighter than a .223 hunting rifle.

That being said, it's not the AR15 that is the problem, but the person who chooses to kill or comit
other crimes with it. They could easily use a truck or car to kill if that is their intent and we've seen
that happen in the past 10 years.

Until society begins to accept that killing other innocent human beings is wrong, we'll continue to
see people committing mass murder.

BTW, in Boston and in France recently, explosives were used. Killing is what was wrong, not what
was used.

Most gun related crimes are committed using a 9mm. ARs are rarely used because they can’t be concealed as easily.

 

[AlexB23]

Semi automatics don’t blast a bunch of ammo if you don’t pull the trigger. The advantage is that you can quickly get another shot off if you miss without having to take your eyes off the sights. When you’re shooting at a moving target at a long distance and your encountering any wind getting a kill shot on the first try is extremely lucky. Just because someone has a semi auto doesn’t mean they’re going to be filling their target with lead because every shot destroys the meat and wastes it.

Yeah, sorry for making that statement. But, I still feel that an AK or AR is not necessary for hunting deer. It is an excuse for guys (or gals) to show off.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I am big on the NRA and the right to carry being 79 and born in Texas. I am also a three-tour Vietnam Veteran Christian and carry no longer. I never fired my M-16 but used my M-60 and assorted side arms, profusely. My In-house piece is a .357 Rugar, loaded with underpowered, flat-nosed, target rounds that will not pierce the walls to kill my neighbor. There must be common sense in being armed.

Absolutely, I’m a fellow Texan and I have a Ruger SR22 for the same reason. That and I’d hoped that my wife wouldn’t be too scared to shoot the dang thing but that didn’t work. She fired it one time and won’t fire it again. On the other hand my 12 year old daughter wasn’t scared to shoot it. So I told my wife if she has to use it to protect our family to give it to our 12 year old daughter because she’s a heck of a shot and she ain’t afraid to use it. I know that might not sound like the best idea but it’s better to have a 12 year old who isn’t afraid to shoot it than a wife whose gonna shoot it with her eyes closed because she’s too scared of it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I hate to tell you, but wild animals can be dangerous in the Lower 48, too. There are places where I used to go unarmed growing up that I would not now due to four-legged and no-legged varmints. Main concerns here are black bear and wild hogs, though I've heard cougars scream at night before and have seen bob cats and there have been those killed by dogs in the region.

Ironically, I wouldn't trust the .223 or 5.56x45 round (they aren't the same) against black bear and hog, and neither are Alaska class wild animals. I have been interested, from time to time, in the .308 in an AR platform (the AR-10) because there are round in that caliber that can handle these animals. Why the AR platform? I think the configuration has less muzzle climb. If you look at it, the barrel is directly in line with the top of the stock. And that's it. There's nothing "magic" about the AR platform. I think it's a good technological advancement, but it's not even a new advancement. The AR platform has been around since the 1950s, and have seen civilian models in gun stores since at least the 1970s. What the AR-15 has going for it is the .223 or 5.56X45 round has relatively low recoil. And yes, if it's legal for your state, you can hunt some game using the AR-15.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that everyone "needs" an AR-15. That's like claiming no one "needs" an AR-15. The question is who determines need and whether we can trust their judgment. If you don't feel comfortable owning an AR-15 or any other weapon, then don't.

I live in Dallas and saw about a 300lbs wild hog standing on the sidewalk on my way to the park with my 4 year old son. He ran back into the brush but yeah they’re no joke, they will attack if they feel threatened.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I hate to tell you, but wild animals can be dangerous in the Lower 48, too. There are places where I used to go unarmed growing up that I would not now due to four-legged and no-legged varmints. Main concerns here are black bear and wild hogs, though I've heard cougars scream at night before and have seen bob cats and there have been those killed by dogs in the region.

Ironically, I wouldn't trust the .223 or 5.56x45 round (they aren't the same) against black bear and hog, and neither are Alaska class wild animals. I have been interested, from time to time, in the .308 in an AR platform (the AR-10) because there are round in that caliber that can handle these animals. Why the AR platform? I think the configuration has less muzzle climb. If you look at it, the barrel is directly in line with the top of the stock. And that's it. There's nothing "magic" about the AR platform. I think it's a good technological advancement, but it's not even a new advancement. The AR platform has been around since the 1950s, and have seen civilian models in gun stores since at least the 1970s. What the AR-15 has going for it is the .223 or 5.56X45 round has relatively low recoil. And yes, if it's legal for your state, you can hunt some game using the AR-15.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that everyone "needs" an AR-15. That's like claiming no one "needs" an AR-15. The question is who determines need and whether we can trust their judgment. If you don't feel comfortable owning an AR-15 or any other weapon, then don't.

I don’t have one but I wish I did. I’d rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.