General Discussion

Just reading posts

(688 posts)

72. Saying "off the streets" is weasel-wording. If you want to ban or confiscate them, just say so.

Sun Jul 3, 2016, 05:10 PM

Jul 2016

And in fairness, you just did.

If these "toys" are continued to be sold, they should be well-regulated - maybe stored and used exclusively at "gun clubs." Where else would they be used?

Hunting. The AR platform is one of the most popular hunting rifles in America. And no, it won't "blow away" the target. With a 5 round magazine inserted, it functions identically to any more traditionally styled semiautomatic hunting rifle.

Target shooting. Not everyone belongs to a "gun club". Shooters have taken their guns out into the country for informal target shooting for centuries.

Home defense. An AR-15 (and rifles like) makes an excellent home defense weapon, protestations of those that want to ban them aside.

A single AR-15 can be configured for any of the above activities. There's never been a more versatile firearms platform in history.

Here's an article that goes into more depth:

Why millions of Americans — including me — own the AR-15

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

113 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Simple Gun Control Law [View all] louis c Jul 2016 OP

No one has the Constitutional right to own or buy a car. former9thward Jul 2016 #1

What do you think the "Well Regulated" part of the second amendment means? louis c Jul 2016 #8

It means in good working order TeddyR Jul 2016 #13

Exactly right. Just reading posts Jul 2016 #14

It means the militia is in good working order, not the guns. baldguy Jul 2016 #48

If you had actually researched it you would not have written guillaumeb Jul 2016 #99

Enlighten me TeddyR Jul 2016 #102

Only you can come to enlightenment. eom guillaumeb Jul 2016 #113

In order for a "militia" deathrind Jul 2016 #101

It means that your weapon is the same type and caliber of those issued to the active military. oneshooter Jul 2016 #17

so, the average citizen should be able to own a tank, louis c Jul 2016 #18

Those are considered to be crew served weapons. oneshooter Jul 2016 #20

The guns on tanks have to be made unusable before a civilian can buy one jmowreader Jul 2016 #23

Incorrect sarisataka Jul 2016 #24

I rebuild, repair and restore WW2 era armored vehicles. oneshooter Jul 2016 #27

How about a newly-manufactured minigun? Orrex Jul 2016 #49

In fact I have one of these in my shop. oneshooter Jul 2016 #21

Nuclear weapons are controlled sarisataka Jul 2016 #22

Discriminate vs indiscriminate weapons Reiyuki Jul 2016 #29

How do you propose banning explosives? FBaggins Jul 2016 #58

Well, you basically can't, Reiyuki Jul 2016 #69

it was the original intent Amishman Jul 2016 #40

But 22 caliber is much too high power for a citzen to won... scscholar Jul 2016 #31

????? oneshooter Jul 2016 #34

Nothing. It's an explanation, not a qualification. Donald Ian Rankin Jul 2016 #56

Actually, the 4th ammendment probably covers it quaker bill Jul 2016 #103

Some think edhopper Jul 2016 #2

By law anyone 18-45 is part of the militia Press Virginia Jul 2016 #4

That is heavily debated edhopper Jul 2016 #5

It's the law. It's been on the books for 60 years Press Virginia Jul 2016 #35

so you have no problem restricting edhopper Jul 2016 #36

No. I'm just citing the law as it pertains Press Virginia Jul 2016 #41

And there is a debate edhopper Jul 2016 #43

The only debate is among those who ignore what the founders said regarding the militia Press Virginia Jul 2016 #44

Again edhopper Jul 2016 #46

The same thing they said about telephones and computers Press Virginia Jul 2016 #50

So you think the founders believed in edhopper Jul 2016 #51

The militia was the "whole of the people" Press Virginia Jul 2016 #52

And yet edhopper Jul 2016 #54

Uhhh no Press Virginia Jul 2016 #64

Males ages 18-45 edhopper Jul 2016 #73

False. Press Virginia Jul 2016 #75

You need edhopper Jul 2016 #76

See Heller Press Virginia Jul 2016 #98

Not according to edhopper Jul 2016 #100

He only needs a license and registration to drive on publics roads Press Virginia Jul 2016 #3

Don't need to register a car to own or keep on private property hack89 Jul 2016 #6

I made that distimction in my analogy louis c Jul 2016 #9

You can buy unregistered cars hack89 Jul 2016 #10

Most states excise cars, though, so it would need a title (nt) Recursion Jul 2016 #26

Hence the bill of sale. nt hack89 Jul 2016 #30

Soooo.... linuxman Jul 2016 #7

Exactly. Straw Man Jul 2016 #11

To continue the analogy sarisataka Jul 2016 #12

And any damage done while using the weapon in violation of the law will be called an "accident" (nt) LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #45

Works for me. Just reading posts Jul 2016 #15

I can cross statelines and legally purchase any firearm I want... Heeeeers Johnny Jul 2016 #53

Several years ago my car was seized by the police because the registration was expired ansible Jul 2016 #16

Keep it off the roads. Igel Jul 2016 #19

It doesn't need to be registered to be sold. It needs to be titled Recursion Jul 2016 #25

Eleven Things Congress Could Do On Guns yallerdawg Jul 2016 #28

There are no weapons of war on American streets TeddyR Jul 2016 #55

Ironically... Lizzie Poppet Jul 2016 #60

I stand corrected TeddyR Jul 2016 #63

No weapons of war on our streets? yallerdawg Jul 2016 #65

What "weapon of war" has been used in the US in a terrorist attack or mass shooting? TeddyR Jul 2016 #66

"Designed to create mass casualties." yallerdawg Jul 2016 #67

What right wing NRA talking point did I use TeddyR Jul 2016 #97

They won't Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #105

Limitless NRA talking points! (Happy Fourth of July!) yallerdawg Jul 2016 #108

In my experience when someone says they want guns "off the street" they mean "not in civilian hands" Just reading posts Jul 2016 #62

2016 Democratic Party Platform Draft yallerdawg Jul 2016 #68

Where it says "keep weapons of war—such as assault weapons—off our streets" do you think it's Just reading posts Jul 2016 #70

You had it right. yallerdawg Jul 2016 #71

Saying "off the streets" is weasel-wording. If you want to ban or confiscate them, just say so. Just reading posts Jul 2016 #72

That poster will not bother to read that Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #81

One does what one can. Just reading posts Jul 2016 #82

I know Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #83

Good thing my AR is not a weapon of war Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #79

They use the phrase "weapon of war" as if that, in and of itself, means something should be Just reading posts Jul 2016 #84

And they refuse to accept simple facts Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #85

I've noticed that. Correcting an obvious mistake or even asking for a clarification is dismissed Just reading posts Jul 2016 #87

with 1 million in insurance Skittles Jul 2016 #32

$2 million liability sarisataka Jul 2016 #33

Would you be opposed Abq_Sarah Jul 2016 #37

All cars are unregistered when you buy them... ileus Jul 2016 #38

Awesome idea -- then I can have as many unregistered machine guns as I want on my property aikoaiko Jul 2016 #39

I understand a person can own a fully automatic weopon or tank ect. if you get a special permit. Why doc03 Jul 2016 #42

At least 50% of firearms (probably more) have detachable magazines. The wisdom (or not) of banning Just reading posts Jul 2016 #59

Not talking about confiscation, future sales and maybe buy-backs like I heard they doc03 Jul 2016 #74

"buy-backs" that aren't optional are confiscation discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #77

Did I say buy-backs were mandatory? n/t doc03 Jul 2016 #88

You said like Australia n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #89

The report I heard on Australia never said it was mandatory. n/t doc03 Jul 2016 #92

It's cool, no problem discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #96

The Australian "buy back" was confiscation. Gun owners were told to turn over their guns Just reading posts Jul 2016 #80

What sales without background checks? Require them on all sales, doc03 Jul 2016 #90

The millions of them that will be done by the simple expedience of ignoring the law. Just reading posts Jul 2016 #94

Australia was defacto confiscation Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #86

I didn't realize that. I have heard they worked well in Australia but the report didn't doc03 Jul 2016 #91

I can assure you, the Australian government was mandatory. Just reading posts Jul 2016 #95

And crickets for a response Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #104

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Just reading posts Jul 2016 #107

Well what is your solution to stop a nut from buying a doc03 Jul 2016 #109

Well, let's see Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #110

Well WTF did you start arguing about whether the Australian law was doc03 Jul 2016 #111

See post 95, it was a compulsory buyback Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #112

Well if you have all the answers what would you do to help doc03 Jul 2016 #93

Why not demand a permit for demanding permits? discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #78

A sane country edhopper Jul 2016 #47

If you don't like guns, don't buy one (nt) LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #57

Choice is a good thing (nt) Just reading posts Jul 2016 #61

People who don't like gunz, don't like a toting yahoo standing next to them and Hoyt Jul 2016 #106