Please just list logical, short, punchy reasons that we can actually use in an argument.  Nothing silly, please.  Don't spam this thread please.  Bump if it needs it.

Because the bad guys have them.  Guns save lives. It’s why we want our police heavily armed with high capacity magazines and high-powered rifles, and all the ammunition they carry. We need the same tools for the exact same reason.  In fact, our need is greater, because we are the first responders, and police are often second. We face the criminals first in most events. Police are second responders.  

I need an AR-15 for same reason you "need" a car - there are city buses you could ride.  Plus owning a car is not a right from the US constitution.  People lived for years without cars.  Before cars, not one child died in a car crash or DUI.

You don't need to vote either.  You will be fine on election day if you just stay home. It's even safer that way.

Prisoners have basic "needs" covered - are you saying we only get what they get?  Tell me what you are williign to give up?

why do you need that big polluting SUV?  I'd like them banned, not only for the children but for the elderly who suffer from breathing problems.

Because they are actually used in hunting predators, varmints, and wild hogs in some states.

They are used in "3 gun" competitions.

I need them because the government fears them.  the government has them, except theirs are fully auto -mine is just semi auto.

The AR 15 increases my ability for self defense and self sufficiency.

In areas of gang related violence, you will need the firepower of an ar 15, especially in places where police fear to tread.

Do you really need a boxcutter or sharp knife?  they were used on 911 to kill far more people.  Where were you then when you had a chance to ban them?  

Reginald Denny sure wishes he had one when they pulled him out of his truck after the Rodney King verdict.

I need an ar 15 because My Second Amendment is the last line of defense for your First Amendment.

The Second Amendment was written to ensure citizens had contemporary rifles of military utility, and no single rifle more accurately fits that description today than AR-15 rifles patterned after the M-16 rifle and M-4 carbine that have been the U.S. military standard for half a century.

Those hookers won't get in the trunk by themselves.




 

People don't understand that a ban on "assault weapons" is only the FIRST step. The mere fact that they are targeting an inanimate object that is responsible for such a small percentage of gun crime proves that this is not their real agenda. Disarming American citizens is there actual agenda, and a "gun-free" America will be much more violent than the America we currently live in. Just look at Chicago and NYC, its a proven fact.

This is what I tell people that ask why we need an AR-15. It usually makes them think twice.

Don't mention hunting or sporting, thats NOT what the 2nd Amendment is about.

Its not even so much that the bad guys have them, but that the GOVERNMENT has them, except theirs are full-auto.

If the government switches all of their guns to 10 round semi-auto variants, then fine. Until then, NO!

It increases my capability for self-defense and self-sufficiency.

Because it utilizes the .223 round, popular in sporting firearms and is legal to hunt with here. It is my preference, just as your type and color automobile is to you.

Aye.

I needed one for a carbine course I took.

Wrong answer. You can get a bolt-action .223 that will do the same thing, or a 10-round AR. These are the counter-arguments you need to be prepared for.

Fuck need. You don't need to vote or need free speech or need to end slavery. Those things are rights of free people outlined by our Constitution and to start stripping them away because of a small percentage of the population is an open invite for tyranny. The 2nd amendment was broadly worded for a reason.

Shall not be infringed!!

I don't NEED an ar-15 as much as  I NEED the personal freedom to own any private property that I care to purchase.

Why would anyone need a car?  There are city buses.

Need?

No, I WANT one. This isn't about need, it never has been.

Do yourself a favor, and don't play into their conversation.

Need? Fuck you. I don't need anything. But I sure a shit WANT whatever firearm I damn well please.

And when they try to apply their 'needs' onto your needs, then tell them to politely fuck off. For more fun, find something
that they own and turn it back on them.

"Do you really need a 3,500 sq/ft home?"

"Do you really need $150 jeans or 30 pairs of shoes?"

"Do you really need 6 TV's in your house or an iPad in addition to your laptop?"

Yeah, fuck you too.

I didn't order two Glock 19's this week because I needed them. Fuck no. I fucking WANTED them.

Because, for the last 250 years, a few hundred thousands of our finest sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers stepped forward and LAID DOWN THEIR VERY LIVES ON THE BLOOD SOAKED ALTAR OF LIBERTY


JUST SO I COULD FUCKING HAVE ONE, THAT'S WHY!!!

Same reason you are allowed to open your pie hole and spew your idiotic thoughts.  Its because we re free and a free man hasthe same right to speak his mind as he does to defend himself with modern weaponry.  

It is not about hunting, it is not about an inanimate objext, it is about freedom.  When you start telling a person what they can or cannot say or tell a person what piece of metal they can or cannot own then we are no longer free, rather we are merely servants to our govt.

Because the 2nd amendment is about the right of the People to protect themselves from Tyranical Government, not hunting or target shooting. It was written by the Founding Fathers so that We The People could fight back if our own government became evil oppressors, just as they had. The Government has them so we should have them.

Hunting.

Target shooting.

Competitions (numerous)

Defense in situations where the law has broken down. Think L.A. riots, Hurricane Katrina/New Orleans, etc.

Home defense in places with high incidences of gang violence.

My Second Amendment is the last line of defense for your First Amendment.

Need?!?!? Only allowing people what they "need" sounds like communism! What are you a communist? The Bill of rights speaks of rights not needs....

exactly!  I have also been telling people that the SC has ruled that municipalites have NO obligation to protect /defend you. if they did you could Sue them when you dial 911 and you still get raped/robed/beaten /killed ect.  so....its your responsible for your own protection.

Worth repeating for the slow ones on arfcom!!

In case some motherfucker trying to kill or rob me also has one.

I have 10 round mags as well as 30. Only the ten is legal when hunting and is the one I utilize.

I had someone tell me the other day that I didn't need my AR.  I told them they didn't need their car, and they said that they did.  I further explained that people lived for years without them and that owing a car wasn't even a right.  I went on to explain that they didn't need to vote either.  But, that was a right.  Just like owning an AR was my right.  I explained that the right to keep arms acted as a check and balance to keep the govt form becoming too powerful and to act as a line of defense in case of threats both forign and domestic.

To put it bluntly (and TRUTHFULLY)... I need them because my government seems to fear them. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to instill a little, healthy FEAR into my government.

I get that.  Please STOP reposting it.  I agree with you.  But we are working up logical, calm talking points to beat our liberal friends.  Please help me with this without shouting like a 2 year old.

I want the same weapons system in CONUS to protect me and my family that I used on eight overseas deployments for the US ARMY.

I've used this one three times depending on ifs a woman or man you change the genders and how you say it


When someone breaks into your home to rape your wife, kill your children, an burn your home to the ground wouldn't you want something to protect yourself

It usually shuts them up

Because I wanted one, then my Daughter wanted one, then my wife wanted one. So I needed all three.

why do you need a glass blown pipe?

get the **** out of here.

http://pjmedia.com/blog/for-a-well-regulated-militia-what-firearms-gear-and-skills-should-you-own/

Because the right to defend your person and property from malicious intent is a natural right of all free men.  The government does not grant us this right, and it can not revoke this right.  In a society where a government exists and is to be kept in its rightful place, the citizens must have the same weapons as the military, in order to prevent tyranny.

Why do you need a V8 in your car.



Why does anyone need a 40oz malt liquor



Why do they sell handles of whiskey.



Why does a businessman need billions of dollars.



Why does anyone need a giant ass SUV.



Why does a little kid need a fuckin Ipad.



Because this is America motherfucker, kiss my entire ass.


 

He puts it pretty well:

"Why do you need a smart phone?"

There is an entire sport that, with a few M1 and M1A holdouts, revolves around pure marksmanship with an AR15. The National Rifle Matches have been held and fired with US  service rifles for over 100 years at Camp Perry alone.

Highpower rifle is boring as a spectator, but is an extremely difficult and disciplined sport when fired as a competitor. Everyone should try it once. I did and ended up getting hooked, then you always work harder toward personal goals.

The AR15 also encourages and empowers more women in the sport because of the reduced recoil. and ease of use.

Because individuals as part of a militia need to own the weapons of a basic infantryman.

This has already been decided in the courts. That's why we have the NFA! The 5th circuit court of appeals said that machine guns and sawed-off shotguns and such Could Not Be Banned because the 2nd amendment guaranteed the people the right to own the weapons of a basic infantry soldier in order to form militias! But they said those weapons could be taxed. And thus the NFA '34 was born.

The only answer.

The ability to own a firearms like we do is our badge of freedom. It is the fact that we are born free men and have the right to our own destiny that sets us apart. The American rifleman is the apex of liberty.

Why the fuck are you trying to use logic with liberals?

I makes the perfect accessory for my huge penis.

The right to keep and bear arms was not given but was recognized, and it was recognized specifically to afford the citizens an adequate method of defending themselves specifically from a government that would work to take that right away. The framers knew that all governments have and do work to do so, and indeed, ours has been doing so since the right was recognized. Even being a method of defense from criminals fell far second to defense from government, and though obviously crucial to existence, even hunting was and is simply a peripheral benefit of the true rationale. There is, therefore, a major and obvious conflict of interest in government trying to advance or promote any law concerning the subject, and every law that is promoted by the government should be met with a very high degree of skepticism, even to the point that none should be allowed on the federal level ever. The question is often asked what private citizens need with advanced weaponry, but in the light of the right's original intent, the answer to this question should be clear. For those to which it is not clear, however, the right is intended to afford the citizens with an adequate method of defense from the government, which will always, and without exception, work to take that right away, including the pathetic action of taking advantage of any situation that presents itself. To those that think that there is no need to worry about it, I say, "Really!? From where have you learned your history!?"

If one is able to examine history in an atmosphere of freedom, the rationale of recognizing this right will become self evident. Unfortunately, though, most will not be able to examine history in an atmosphere of freedom. Most will have history taught to them by government, which by its very nature, cannot provide an atmosphere of freedom but of force, for force is the natural and unavoidable condition by which all governments operate. Governments have to operate by force; force is necessary to the existence of any government and cannot ever be relinquished by them. This is another major and obvious conflict of interest in expecting any government to teach the truth when the truth undermines the self-perceived (illegitimate) authority of the government, which the truth so often does. In other words, when the truth undermines an authority which government has usurped or desires to usurp, the government will not teach that truth; it must teach a lie, and this is the case in an exceeding and growing number of issues.

How, then, can "reasonable" laws be introduced when any law introduced by a representative of government will carry a conflict of interest? One of the great many benefits of how our nation was set up at first was that the people had a voice of authority independent of government (another of those rights that were recognized and not given). Though still imperfect in the perverse and corrupt atmosphere that permeates all human dealings, especially with government and its nature of force, this right would afford the best protection possible from that perversion and corruption. Secondly, the framers set up a great dissemination of power and authority in which numerous concepts could be tried and tested. The framers new very well the extreme dangers of the concentration of power and authority and worked their best to provide a protection against it; although they knew from history that it was inevitable. The prevention of it (the concentration of power) happening again would be another situation that would be bolstered if history were taught in an atmosphere of freedom, but this is another case where the truth would undermine the authority that government has usurped for itself or desires to. Again, there is a major and obvious conflict of interest in the government teaching the truth that it cannot and should never be trusted nor allowed to concentrate power to itself, and the government cannot teach the truth but must teach a lie. Numerous concepts have, indeed, been tried and tested, but only those that are in line with the interests of the government will naturally be taught by the government. Any doubt about the truth of that shows a great naivete concerning the nature of government.

Always be skeptical of government and the ideas which it promotes. No government can or should be trusted. Deliverance from any social hardship should never be sought from any government, nor is it ever even able to provide that deliverance. The Bible says to be obedient to civil authorities but never to trust them, and it says to always seek out, submit to, and be obedient to God's methods and ways of deliverance and provision. In so doing, one will find true rest and peace.

Logically

- Because I am a reserve soldier and need to maintain a high level of marksmanship on my own time

- Because I enjoy the shooting sports and find it inspiring that so many women are naturally better shots than men  ( this applies particularly to the female libtard)

- As a martial artist I find consistent themes of discipline and safety in the shooting sports

- the previous AWB has made me a passionate collector of fire arms

- self defense in the context of a long term catastrophe

-It is a rifle that embodies the American personality, it can be configured endlessly to fit an individuals body type and preferences. This includes astehtics and nostalgia.

- The AR 15 represents the thing that makes Americans exceptional: the freedom to take responsibility for your own protection and that of other around you.

Contribute or get the **** out.

 

No....you dont get it.

That is the only answer. To start fishing for definitive examples of specific uses that justify the ownership of semi auto high capacity military style rifles simply takes you down a dead end path....someone can always explain away those specific uses and give you alternate options.

Because I am a free man and the contract between me and the government that serves me enumerates the fact that there are certain freedoms upon which they are not allowed to encroach or infringe.

Period point blank....there is no other reason and there doesnt need to be. To change the narrative is to fall into their trap.

You can say fuck inside of a thread. It's OK.
 

The same reason anyone "needs" a Corvette: it looks fun and I want one.

Also, to exercise my 2A rights, I believe that my weapon should be able to give pause to the government. 2A does NOT discuss sporting, something our president doesn't seem to understand. It does not guarantee us the right to be able to play sports - it guarantees us the right to be able to form a regulated militia which, by definition, needs to be armed IOT prevent tyrannical oppression.

And, BTW, a militia does NOT mean the fucking National Guard!!!!!! Just because I worked for Jenny & the Mole, and then Snyder does not mean that I can fight back if the President chooses to forget his place. Being sworn into the Army means he was still my commander in chief, and I would be committing an act of treason if I disobeyed him. A militia that intends to prevent government oppression needs to be formed by private citizens to effectively meet that description.

I think. Just my understanding.

from the declaration of independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

so to give the people of their newly formed nation the power to 'dissolve political bands', they specifically recognized that  'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'

it's that fucking simple. not about hunting...not about sport shooting...not about having the burden of proof to explain why we need it. FUCK. THAT. SHIT.

Because of what happened in Libya, Iraq and many other countries before (including or own) and now Syria. Who are the “bad guys” there?

Can it happen here? I hope to hell not for the sake of all that have laid down their lives so it does not happen. If it does, well there is your answer why I have them.

Not to change the subject but I find it very hypocritical that so many that are on the “ban the assault rifle” soap box because they kill innocent people, are the same ones who are ok with cutting a unborn baby apart in it’s mother’s womb and tossing the parts in the trash. Who are the real fanatical killers?