Jump to content

How the AR-15 became 'America's national gun' and loved by the National Rifle Association


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not at all. I never lived in the US, but I owned 3 weapons- 2 rifles and a shotgun. No longer though.

If I lived in the US I'd have a lot more than that, including handguns, and lots of ammunition ready in magazines.

For what?

  • Like 2
Posted
8 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Not the civilian version and I doubt if any military uses it today.   US military didn't like it, and why it was upgraded to the M16. 

 

If it wasn't for the media, and the attempt to ban it, it wouldn't be so popular.  For 30 yrs, it had poor sales, and not until the Brady bill did sales rocket.

 

With every attempt to ban it, sales and profits (price also) have gone up.   You want to encourage people to own something .... tell them they can't.

The best weapon for home protection is a shotgun, IMO. Don't even have to take time to aim.

Second best would be a handgun.

 

Fear is probably why so many have weapons in the US, and I'm sure the media are doing all they can to make people fearful, with all the stories about crime.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I agree that a fully auto weapon has no place in any civil society.

Why do you want to infringe on my right to keep and bear arms? The Second Amendment does not ban fully auto weapons.

 

The Las Vegas mass shooter used bump stocks on some thirteen of his weapons, allowing him to murder sixty-one persons, and wound a staggering four-hundred and thirteen (at least) persons in a short amount of time.

 

While bump stocks have been banned since ~ 2018, I think that ban is on track to be rescinded eventually by SCOTUS.

 

 

A U.S. appeals court blocks a ban on rapid-fire 'bump stocks'

 

NEW ORLEANS — A Trump administration ban on bump stocks — devices that enable a shooter to rapidly fire multiple rounds from semi-automatic weapons after an initial trigger pull — was struck down Friday by a federal appeals court in New Orleans.

 

The ban was instituted after a gunman perched in a high-rise hotel using bump stock-equipped weapons massacred dozens of people in Las Vegas in 2017. Gun rights advocates have challenged it in multiple courts. The 13-3 ruling at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of appeals is the latest on the issue, which is likely to be decided at the Supreme Court.

 

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/07/1147698112/bump-stocks-ban-struck-down-court

 

 

  • Confused 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Lemsta69 said:

Taking a guess, but most drafted into the Nam war, never owned or even shot a rifle, let alone how to care for one.

 

Major 'known' drawback of the AR-15, M16, M14, and told about in boot camp (yes I was told) ... they suck if they get dirt, any dirt in the barrel or mechanisms.

 

Complaints to parents, would fall under 'user error'...IMHO   Also the .223, excellent in open areas, not so in jungle warfare, as round is too light vs the heavy AK round.

 

Still an excellent weapon, M16, and as with all machines, only as good as the operator.   I loved it.

 

I talk from experience, not news-blips or Op-eds.  Even more fun to  shoot is the M60 .. ????

Posted
6 minutes ago, bamnutsak said:

Why do you want to infringe on my right to keep and bear arms? The Second Amendment does not ban fully auto weapons.

 

The Las Vegas mass shooter used bump stocks on some thirteen of his weapons, allowing him to murder sixty-one persons, and wound a staggering four-hundred and thirteen (at least) persons in a short amount of time.

 

While bump stocks have been banned since ~ 2018, I think that ban is on track to be rescinded eventually by SCOTUS.

 

 

A U.S. appeals court blocks a ban on rapid-fire 'bump stocks'

 

NEW ORLEANS — A Trump administration ban on bump stocks — devices that enable a shooter to rapidly fire multiple rounds from semi-automatic weapons after an initial trigger pull — was struck down Friday by a federal appeals court in New Orleans.

 

The ban was instituted after a gunman perched in a high-rise hotel using bump stock-equipped weapons massacred dozens of people in Las Vegas in 2017. Gun rights advocates have challenged it in multiple courts. The 13-3 ruling at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of appeals is the latest on the issue, which is likely to be decided at the Supreme Court.

 

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/07/1147698112/bump-stocks-ban-struck-down-court

 

Guess you missed the part about WELL REGULATED?

 

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country:

 

Posted
1 minute ago, pomchop said:

Guess you missed the part about WELL REGULATED?

 

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country:

 

Of course I didn't "miss it", but that argument carries little sway with SCOTUS and gun nuts.

 

And, by the way the exact wording is

 

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.

 

 

And, by the way, most gun nuts argue that the "well-regulated milita" is but a preamble describing the "environment", and not a requirement.

 

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, jvs said:

Wish they came up with something new and original but that will never happen because they can't.

Agreed, but ~ 25 states have passed some form of "Stand your ground" (which has been extended to anywhere you might be) or "Castle Doctrine" laws.

 

 

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, jvs said:

Sure ,sure,when is the last time you got attacked in your home?

I you have so many enemies maybe it is something about you?

But i understand,any excuse no matter how old or worn out is being used

by the gun people.

Wish they came up with something new and original but that will never happen because they can't.

Something wrong with being prepared.   Home invasions & burglaries are real.  Most homes in my neighborhood were broken into, except mine, my friends, and other known gun owners .... Go figure.

 

It's a right to own ... nobody is forced to participate. 

 

I have flat tire repair in my car,  Haven't had a flat tire (car) in years, if not a decade, but I still have a fix or spare.  Better to have, than need, works in so many situations.

Edited by KhunLA
  • Confused 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
49 minutes ago, bamnutsak said:

And how did these burglers/home invaders know that you were a gun owner?

Me shooting firearms in the yard would be a pretty good clue.

 

Have a nice day

  • Confused 1
Posted
17 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

Why do you want to infringe on my right to keep and bear arms? The Second Amendment does not ban fully auto weapons.

 

I doubt they could even imagine fully auto weapons in 1791.

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
17 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

 

Of course I didn't "miss it", but that argument carries little sway with SCOTUS and gun nuts.

 

And, by the way the exact wording is

 

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.

 

 

And, by the way, most gun nuts argue that the "well-regulated milita" is but a preamble describing the "environment", and not a requirement.

 

 

IMO the militia they wanted was to keep the government from becoming like the one they overthrew, not one to protect from foreign invaders.

Perhaps they understood the meaning of
"power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
1 minute ago, herfiehandbag said:

Even they, deep down  acknowledge that they (thoughts and prayers) are mere hypothetical platitudes.

 

It is a price they are prepared to pay to indulge their delusions.

Are you claiming that armed crime and home invasions in America are a delusion?

  • Confused 1
Posted
47 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

READ THIS SLOWLY & CAREFULLY

 

IF you ban ALL RIFLES ..

... you'll only stop about 400 murders.

 

I rounded up, as latest FBI stats are 364

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls

 

1.png

So collateral damage of around 400 is fine to keep your rights eh? Does it mention how many kids were in that 400?

 

By the way, its more than that, latest figures from 2021 are 447 and that does not take into account the 4,740 firearm deaths where the weapon was unknown, so could be a rifle or handgun.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
3 hours ago, KhunLA said:

READ THIS SLOWLY & CAREFULLY

 

IF you ban ALL RIFLES ..

... you'll only stop about 400 murders.

 

I rounded up, as latest FBI stats are 364

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls

 

1.png

And there you have it. 400 murders a year (how many children?) make an acceptable price to pay for the "freedom" to possess military weapons.

 

You really cannot argue with that, it would be like trying to pee up Niagara Falls!

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...