User Panel
|
There are more Illegal border jumpers in circulation than there are AR-15's.
What are we doing about that? |
|
Why do a majority of non gun owners get to say anything about gun ownership???
Like abortion??? |
|
Red Flag can accomplish the same thing while taking a conservative off the street.
They don’t NEED to ban AR’s. TC |
|
Is today backwards day? Breitbart has McConnel saying AWB front and center and NYT saying too late for AWB. Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!
|
|
No clue what they are talking about. I haven't seen any around here.
|
|
So ... that means they need to gather them up at a disposal station?
|
|
It's never too late to ban anything. Laws are made and laws are broken. If the government does ban AR15's there will be epic non-compliance.
|
|
Quoted:
He doesn't mention something that will become even more important in the future: 3D printing. Eventually the technology will exist for people to just print AR-15's at home. Then they will try to restrict 3D printing. Then something else will come along. We may be shooting Plasma Rifles in the 40-Watt range before the AR-15 finally dies the death. View Quote |
|
They should be more worried about "sniper rifles". Those would be far more useful for things.
|
|
|
Quoted:
It's gotta be higher. There's like 500m guns in the US and only 15m are MSRs? View Quote You can get a baseline by looking at number of rifles manufactured by makers you know only make AR15s. I dont believe anyone is keeping track of lowers sold so home built ARs are not included in any statistics. I have also seen a firearms retailer survey from 2011 that said 21% of all reported sales were AR15s. Only guesses |
|
Years ago there was a design for a microwave weapon made from a microwave oven, I have not seen it for a long time, I don't know if it would work, but I know microwave communication dishes on navy ships would be used to kill seagulls in flight and set small island trees on fire. So the idea of an energy weapon is not to far fetched.
I think a railgun could be done at home, thing what a BB running at 20 or 30 thousand feet per second would do to a target, even limited life the shots it would shoot would mist a target. |
|
Interesting they are now admitting this (while still stating the same old tired lies.)
Here is a link to a PDF doc explaining about the "reminder problem" for existing firearms in face of a ban. Fordham Law School (direct link to PDF) This is worth a read as you can pull some arguments against a ban out of it. Especially the "porous borders" part. |
|
Quoted:
How many people keep a 3D printer at home? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
He doesn't mention something that will become even more important in the future: 3D printing. Eventually the technology will exist for people to just print AR-15's at home. Then they will try to restrict 3D printing. Then something else will come along. We may be shooting Plasma Rifles in the 40-Watt range before the AR-15 finally dies the death. |
|
Quoted: Flooding the market is absolutely required, for a number of reasons. Namely upcoming legal challenges - "common use." View Quote |
|
Quoted:
Boom Chaka Laka It's Too Late to Ban Assault Weapons
The half-life of military-style rifles ensures they'll be with us for many generations. Time to deal with the world as it is. View Quote With proper care and maintenance, an AR-15 rifle manufactured today will fire just as effectively in the year 2119 and probably for decades after that.
There are currently around 15 million military-style rifles in civilian hands in the United States. They are very rarely used in suicides or crimes. But when they are, the bloodshed is appalling. Acknowledging the grim reality that we will live among these guns indefinitely is a necessary first step toward making the nation safer. Frustratingly, calling for military-style rifles bans as I have done for years may be making other lifesaving gun laws harder to pass. President Trump on Wednesday touring two mass shooting sites in Ohio and Texas said that "there is no political appetite" for a new ban of assault weapons. Never mind that a majority of Americans support such a ban. Short of forced confiscation or a major cultural shift, our great-great-great-grandchildren will live side-by-side with the guns we have today and make tomorrow. That also means that we're far closer to the beginning of the plague of mass public shootings with military-style weapons than we are to the end. Little wonder that major companies are now including mass shootings in their risk to shareholder filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. View Quote Not only is confiscation politically untenable the compliance rates of gun owners when bans are passed are laughably low. The distribution of these weapons across society makes even their prohibition nearly impossible. In 1996, Australia launched a mandatory gun buyback of 650,000 military-style weapons. While gun ownership per capita in the country declined by more than 20 percent, today Australians own more guns than they did before the buyback. New Zealand's leaders, in the wake of the Christchurch massacre, launched a compulsory buyback effort for the tens of thousands of military-style weapons estimated to be in the country.
For context: In 2016 alone, more than one million military-style weapons were added to America's existing civilian arsenal, according to industry estimates. Not only are the number of total guns in America orders of magnitude larger than other nations, the political imagination is far less ambitious. Consider a federal assault weapons ban that Democrats introduced this year. It is purely a messaging bill since there was no chance it will win support from Republicans and become law. Yet even this thought experiment falls far short: The bill bans military-style weapons, except for the millions of military-style weapons already in circulation. View Quote View Quote |
|
View Quote |
|
"and robust licensing systems like those passed in Massachusetts "
Um, it is very rare that you get denied for a license here. I know of no one with a clean record who has been. That said, there are towns where the Chief just won't do it. That really id the only thing "robust" about it. I have had my LTC A for decades. My oldest son got both my wife and middle son LTC classes for their birthday (all born in March). They all went together and applied in their towns of residence (3 different towns about 15 miles apart). All 3 got their LTC A (unrestricted license to carry) within 30 days. |
|
|
Quoted:
Hard to believe they're publishing the 15M number. There's a lot more than that, but they used to report it as a fringe weapon. View Quote This idea of it being "fringe" is why for years political leftist and talking heads have suggested crap like "confiscation" and "buy backs" because they were under the impression it's doable because they believe normal people don't own such things and only a few fringe people do. |
|
Came from the dupe.
I agree with the premise that there's too much out there to make a ban a viable solution for the left. And I've been doing my part to ensure that is the case. |
|
I saw this article earlier.
Was going to make a thread. The motto of this story is... The anti gunners get smarter. We are stuck on stupid. This article is supposed to make you "feel" are warm and fuzzy as a gun owner. That's the point. To make you comfortable while they strip away OUR rights. This one got me Like radioactive waste, a gun is most often handled safely. Depending on the type, it poses varying levels of harm to humans. View Quote This is why we will lose. They (the antis) aren't that stupid. They know we will give up a "little" to save the rest. They come/ask for EVERYTHING in the hopes of only getting SOMETHING. And we fold every fucking time. Example: "We want all your guns" "Well wait, no you can't have them all. But we'll settle for full auto ban" A few years later..... "We want all your guns" "Well wait a minute, you can have (insert one of many things they've blatantly stolen over the years) Few years after that.... "We want all your guns" "Well just take the semi autos at least let us keep the rest" Eventually.... "We want all your guns" "Wait! You already took them all"! *Edited to add: The next thing you know, the Dems will be saying "guns for all"! And the repubs will be saying "no! BAN it all now"! Flip flop motherfuckers. I trust none of them. Nor do I like any of them. How bout they do their fuckin job. Not infringe our rights. (yep, wishful thinking) |
|
Quoted: Back in the 1990's it was "niche" firearm. I can't tell you how many times I was asked, "What do you need a gun like that for?" My favorite was: "Those are man-killers. What do you want that for?" My response: "You just said it." My buddy Tommy J. says sometimes you need to shoot a motherfucker in the face with a rifle. Can't tell you how many times I watched the blood drain from someone's face after I said that. But my all-time, never gets old favorite is: When the subject of Fifty-caliber sniper rifles comes up and some Fudd says, "What do you hunt with that?" My answer was always, "Semi's." Bearcats. JOKING....JOKING. View Quote |
|
|
Quoted:
Their line of "The majority of American's support an AWB" smells like bullshit. If it were true they'd call for an outright ban on civilian ownership and an immediate confiscation or turn in with anyone not doing it a felon after a short period of time. But very few on the left are doing that. Even the nutcases among the 2020 hopefuls aren't going that far. They couch it behind terms like "buy back". If the support they claim exists they wouldn't have to do that. View Quote There's TONS of gun owners that don't like "assault weapons". |
|
Quoted:
True that. Get back on the clock, everybody. Fight's not over yet. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
Quoted:
Holy Shit! One person at least can see reality for what it is! ETA: only 15 million? There's AT LEAST probably triple that! View Quote ETA: I mean this. I don't know if this is a great way to get a sample - but AR15s are EVERYWHERE. Armslist, gunbroker, local classifieds... |
|
Quoted: I have had similar conversations, I just got puzzled looks. View Quote |
|
|
Quoted:
Interesting they are now admitting this (while still stating the same old tired lies.) Here is a link to a PDF doc explaining about the "reminder problem" for existing firearms in face of a ban. Fordham Law School (direct link to PDF) This is worth a read as you can pull some arguments against a ban out of it. Especially the "porous borders" part. View Quote Without a commitment to or capacity for eliminating the existing inventory of private guns, the supply-side ideal and regulations based on it cannot be taken seriously. It is best to acknowledge the blocking power of the remainder and adjust our gun control regulations and goals to that reality. Policymakers who continue to press legislation grounded on the supply-side ideal while disclaiming the goal of prohibition are deluded or pandering. |
|
|
From the comments.
"Todd Kenneth Dwyer Santa Clara, California6h ago Times Pick Ban all semiautomatic rifles, pistols and shotguns; only revolvers, bolt-action rifles and double-barrel shotguns would be legal. Offer twice the MSRP of any newly banned weapon ($2K for an AR or AK; same for a high-end semi-auto pistol or rifle). If there are 15-million AR/AK platforms, that would work out to $30-billion (how much did we spend on the Iraq war)? The folks who own these things -- in the bush-belt, the bubba-belt, the bible-belt, the venison-belt, the fenatnyl belt -- they could probably use the cash to buy/replace all their banned weapons with some really nice hunting rifles, revolvers and shotguns, and still come away with lots of money in their pocket. Bolt-action rifles, revolvers and double-barrel shotguns don't take high-capacity magazines; after two, four or six shots, you need to reload. No bolt-action rifle, revolver or double-barrel shotguns are capable of producing the kind of carnage we've seen in Columbine, Orlando, Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, El Paso or Dayton. And here's the beauty of it: nobody's right to keep and bear arms would be infringed. People would be prevented from buying and/or owning semiautomatic firearms the same way they are prevented from buying or owning hand grenades, mortars and Stinger surface-to-air missiles. There would be a one-year grace period to sell the newly banned guns back. After that time, you face time. Common sense gun control -- what's wrong with that?" "David Wiswell USA6h ago Times Pick We as a nation cured ourselves of slavery, at great cost and with residual problems but we did it. We can cure ourselves of this blood lust by calling out these weapons for what they are and expressing our disgust as a society for those without the moral courage to act decisively to get these murder weapons out of our society. We should no longer tolerate the very idea of supporting weapons for mass murder, it should become as repugnant as child sexual abuse, just totally unacceptable in civil society." "Michael Barr Athens, OhioAug. 9 Times Pick Sure, military style weapons will be here in the long term. But outlawing their manufacturing and promoting buy-back programs can make a significant dent in their numbers. That alone will save lives. And sure, cultural changes are needed too. Remember when smoking cigarettes was considered "cool?" Then it wasn't, and rates dropped markedly. What if the same thing happened with guns? For instance, if women refused to date men who are gun-focused (that would include all who have assault type weapons). That might help. Let's face it: the shooters are overwhelmingly male. These gun guys typically have arsenals and often wouldn't think about leaving home without "packing heat." Shun them. Yes, it's no magic bullet, but it might prevent a few tragedies." |
|
The Left has realized that banning evil features, like they did with the AWB, doesn't work.
The new strategy is to restrict ownership of firearms instead. The whole RFL bullshit is the first step in that process. Once they gain the power to deny gun ownership at will, without a crime having been committed, they'll move on to the next infringement. And then the next. And then another, and so on... |
|
Jesus, for once the NYT said something I agree with.
<---Faints. |
|
Quoted:
The Left has realized that banning evil features, like they did with the AWB, doesn't work. The new strategy is to restrict ownership of firearms instead. The whole RFL bullshit is the first step in that process. Once they gain the power to deny gun ownership at will, without a crime having been committed, they'll move on to the next infringement. And then the next. And then another, and so on... View Quote |
|
Quoted: Much higher. 15 million was a number sold since the AWB ended, and is out if date by several years. ETA: 500 million is.low. Very low. View Quote The numbers don't seem right. It HAS to be more than 15 million. Hell, I have so many lowers laying around, I can't even remember where they all are. So look at it this way...how many 4473's do you fill out when you buy more than one lower at a time? I've never filled out more than one form. Are they counting transfers or complete rifle sales? Are they even counting receivers? What about 80% lowers? Hell we have a member here cranking 50 of the fuckers out in a night using a mold made of lego's! The ONLY way they are going to win is via a 1000 cuts. Universal Background checks. State by state bullshit like ammo carding/ limitations. Mental health/ RFL bullshit. Another AWB will not work and confiscation will get really ugly, really fast. A buyback will be a joke. |
|
In before he’s declared a pariah by his peers for showing some common sense.
|
|
|
Holy shit!
We're screwed if the left starts saying and doing stuff that actually makes sense. |
|
View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
The Left has realized that banning evil features, like they did with the AWB, doesn't work. The new strategy is to restrict ownership of firearms instead. The whole RFL bullshit is the first step in that process. Once they gain the power to deny gun ownership at will, without a crime having been committed, they'll move on to the next infringement. And then the next. And then another, and so on... |
|
|
I can say, I honestly don't know anyone that owns just one AR so take one, I pick another one up and use it, then throw in the magazines and the tens of thousands of rounds that many of us own...shit they have no chance at even making a dent in our stockpiles.
Just the trillions of rounds of ammo, come on, do they really think they can shut us down? Besides the guns I have already built, the number of lowers, both 80% and stripped here as well as LPK's, uppers barrels and BCG's, If I really wanted to work hard, I could replace what I have in about 12 hours and be right back out there, that genie has left the bottle a long time ago and that bitch is not going to get back into the bottle. |
|
Quoted:
Flooding the market is absolutely required, for a number of reasons. Namely upcoming legal challenges - "common use." View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope Anderson and PSA keep selling all the low cost low quality items they possibly can. I want to see these numbers going up, up, up, up for this exact reason. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.