The second amendment

Political debate. Welcome Yahoo Message Board exiles and everybody else !!
User avatar
Pete
Site Admin
Posts: 14868
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 1:15 am
Location: North GA USA

Re: The second amendment

Post by Pete » Mon May 03, 2021 5:54 pm

Shred wrote:
Mon May 03, 2021 5:32 pm
I know.

The only completely free country, is one that is completely anarchic, aka a warzone.
In such a place, anyone and their mate's dog would needs self defence gear by the lorry load

But in civilisation, where there are laws, and people can get arrested or killed for breaking those laws, people are protected and don't need as much gear for their own security and well being.
Who gets to decide how much is enough?
0 x
"Come on, man" is now an acceptable rebuttal in a political debate

User avatar
barrysoetoro
Consigliere
Posts: 64699
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 7:55 pm

Re: The second amendment

Post by barrysoetoro » Mon May 03, 2021 6:02 pm

nolaxride wrote:
Mon May 03, 2021 4:44 pm
barrysoetoro wrote:
Sun May 02, 2021 6:46 pm
nolaxride wrote:
Sun May 02, 2021 3:19 pm
barrysoetoro wrote:
Fri Apr 30, 2021 6:01 pm
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 6:44 pm
Shred wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 3:36 pm
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 12:47 pm
So you agree there are limits, gun controls, required in our society?

And tell me, what happens if the 5.56 doesn't hit anything to start the tumble? Would you believe a Vietnam vet writing in the American Thinker?

https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... am_ki.html

To quote the conclusion, "The lethality of the 5.56mm cartridge, sold on lies, cannot be fixed in truth. It is time the Department of Defense recognizes this 'Big Lie' from the Vietnam War and in the names of MSgt Kevin N. Morehead and SFC William M. Bennett replaces this varmint cartridge with one that gives our warriors that critical capability described by SFC Paul Howe above——one—round knockdown power!"
Our soldiers in Afghanistan were finding inadequacies with the SA80 (developed from the AR18) a 5.56mm rifle designed to NATO standards.
They had problems with range and lethality.
As a result Lewis Machine and Tool Company of the USA were contracted to make a 7.62mm NATO calibre rifle to supplement British forces in Afghanistan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Mac ... ol_Company

I grant you, it looks like an AR-15 but it's more like an AR-10 or the old SLR, in fact the old SLR would have done the job.

The .223 / 5.56mm concept is indeed a flawed concept.
They are good for target shooting. I've used them in the 300-50 yard range. Beyond that, 6mm Creedmoor.
You don't need an ar-15. It's a weapon of war. It needs to be off the streets
You are correct. My target rifle is essentially an AR-15 shooting a .223. It is a single shot. Would you consider that a weapon of war?
Your president said that, moron.
No. He didn't. A single-shot AR-15 with a 26" barrel would not be considered an assault weapon.
Your president said you don't need an ar-15. It's a weapon of war. It needs to be off the streets.
0 x

Shred
Associate
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2014 5:53 pm

Re: The second amendment

Post by Shred » Mon May 03, 2021 6:54 pm

Pete wrote:
Mon May 03, 2021 5:54 pm
Who gets to decide how much is enough?
Do you need an RPG ?
Do you need a Howitzer ?
Do you need a tank ?
Does any civilian ?

A bit of common sense suggests, no.

I've said it before, when it comes to firearms, to a point the genie is out of the bottle.
It's not practical to go to the extent the UK has, and require everyone to have a licence.

Also, with regards to pistols, rifles & shotguns, there's justification to have firearms.
But what justification is there to have things like high capacity magazines, or bumpfire stocks ?

If I lived in your country, I would definitely have guns.
I'd have a shotgun like this:


I'd have rifles and pistols for target shooting and being British, I'd definitely own a British bolt action rifle, I'd probably go for the classic .303 Lee Enfield.

I'd really love to have a go with one of these as well:
0 x
Everything from a knife to a nuke constitutes arms, nobody ever complains they can't openly carry a bazooka or drive around with an ICBM.

User avatar
nolaxride
Global Moderator
Posts: 29294
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:09 pm

Re: The second amendment

Post by nolaxride » Tue May 04, 2021 8:08 pm

barrysoetoro wrote:
Mon May 03, 2021 6:02 pm
nolaxride wrote:
Mon May 03, 2021 4:44 pm
barrysoetoro wrote:
Sun May 02, 2021 6:46 pm
nolaxride wrote:
Sun May 02, 2021 3:19 pm
barrysoetoro wrote:
Fri Apr 30, 2021 6:01 pm
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 6:44 pm
Shred wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 3:36 pm
nolaxride wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 12:47 pm
So you agree there are limits, gun controls, required in our society?

And tell me, what happens if the 5.56 doesn't hit anything to start the tumble? Would you believe a Vietnam vet writing in the American Thinker?

https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... am_ki.html

To quote the conclusion, "The lethality of the 5.56mm cartridge, sold on lies, cannot be fixed in truth. It is time the Department of Defense recognizes this 'Big Lie' from the Vietnam War and in the names of MSgt Kevin N. Morehead and SFC William M. Bennett replaces this varmint cartridge with one that gives our warriors that critical capability described by SFC Paul Howe above——one—round knockdown power!"
Our soldiers in Afghanistan were finding inadequacies with the SA80 (developed from the AR18) a 5.56mm rifle designed to NATO standards.
They had problems with range and lethality.
As a result Lewis Machine and Tool Company of the USA were contracted to make a 7.62mm NATO calibre rifle to supplement British forces in Afghanistan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Mac ... ol_Company

I grant you, it looks like an AR-15 but it's more like an AR-10 or the old SLR, in fact the old SLR would have done the job.

The .223 / 5.56mm concept is indeed a flawed concept.
They are good for target shooting. I've used them in the 300-50 yard range. Beyond that, 6mm Creedmoor.
You don't need an ar-15. It's a weapon of war. It needs to be off the streets
You are correct. My target rifle is essentially an AR-15 shooting a .223. It is a single shot. Would you consider that a weapon of war?
Your president said that, moron.
No. He didn't. A single-shot AR-15 with a 26" barrel would not be considered an assault weapon.
Your president said you don't need an ar-15. It's a weapon of war. It needs to be off the streets.
A single shot AR-15 with a 26" barrel is not a weapon of war. The standard barrel is only 16".
0 x
-- Ο Μπάρι είναι ηλίθιος

Post Reply