- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: They aren't coming for your guns, right? (for the 8,432nd time)
Posted on 6/8/24 at 8:17 am to bbvdd
Posted on 6/8/24 at 8:17 am to bbvdd
quote:
Can I buy an M4 that is the exact same gun that’s issued by the military? I mean the exact gun. Answer that question.
Of course not since 1986 or whenever.
But what you are losing isnt that big of a deal.
Of course you be a build a gun guy and spend money and time to make it extremely similar. Or you can just accept the knock off for what it can do which is pew pew.
3
Posted on 6/8/24 at 8:21 am to jangalang
quote:
build a gun guy
What hell is a “build a gun guy”?
Posted on 6/8/24 at 8:26 am to civiltiger07
quote:
What hell is a “build a gun guy”?
They are the people that aftermarket every component of their weapons because they cant get laid at night so they finger frick with an armorers wrench
Posted on 6/8/24 at 8:31 am to jangalang
quote:
They are the people that aftermarket every component of their weapons because they cant get laid at night so they finger frick with an armorers wrench
What?
You sound like the sexually frustrated person.
Posted on 6/8/24 at 9:47 am to civiltiger07
quote:
What?
You can't comprehend clear and concise grammar is your own problem.
quote:
You sound like the sexually frustrated person.
Because I laugh at freakshows for
nitpicking so called "off brand quad rails" as if off brand quad rails is such a thing. That makes total sense.
This post was edited on 6/8/24 at 9:48 am
Posted on 6/8/24 at 11:08 am to jangalang
quote:
aftermarket
I didn’t know these brands were considered “aftermarket”:
Colt
FNH
Matech
Knights Armament Company
Daniel Defense
Trijicon
EOTech
And I can’t take anyone serious when the hypenate “M-4” and “A-1”.
Posted on 6/8/24 at 12:19 pm to jangalang
quote:
finger frick with an armorers wrench
I need further explanation of what this means.
This post was edited on 6/8/24 at 12:20 pm
Posted on 6/8/24 at 1:23 pm to jangalang
quote:
They are the people that aftermarket every component of their weapons because they cant get laid at night so they finger frick with an armorers wrench
well said
Posted on 6/8/24 at 1:31 pm to cgrand
At this point you're both arguing a gay point and complimenting each other in a gay way.
Just rub each others NOS barrels and get it over with.
Just rub each others NOS barrels and get it over with.
Posted on 6/8/24 at 2:10 pm to cgrand
quote:
quote:
Seems we already lost you.
no...my point is that if the only argument offered against 2A infringement is what 2 different labels we slap on on the same thing, we have all already lost. we have to make the right argument.
My argument for the 2nd amendment is every gun law on the books is unconstitutional. They are all an infringement.
Civilians should be able to own fully automatic in any caliber firearms. When the 2nd amendment was written there were civilians who had personal cannons. There were privately owned armed ships, some of which were better armed than a military version.
In 1776 there were Belton repeater rifles capable of firing 8 rounds in 3 seconds. The assumption that the founders didnt intend for modern weapons to be in civilian hands is complete bullshite. They were fighting a revelation against the strongest, largest, most heavily armed country in existence. They would have wanted any weapon available, and they had the foresight to acknowledge that after winning that war that civilians would need access to heavy weapons to control the new government.
Posted on 6/8/24 at 2:27 pm to bbvdd
Weapons don't kill people, sick people do.
Posted on 6/8/24 at 2:54 pm to alphaandomega
if that’s what you think then fine, I happen to agree with you. But calling an AR “not a weapon of war” is just lying to yourself and that’s not going to work
Posted on 6/8/24 at 3:37 pm to DownSouthJukin
quote:
And there are plenty of semi-autos that are blowback and recoil-operated, including the CETME, G3, and their variants.
The Ma Deuce is recoil operated too. I would be happy to have one of those if they take away the AR-15 (although the cost of ammo would be a bitch).
Posted on 6/8/24 at 7:27 pm to jangalang
quote:
But what you are losing isnt that big of a deal.
If it isn’t that big of a deal, why can’t I have it?
Why can’t I have an m249 in the military configuration? I know I can buy a semi auto version, but I want a fully auto version.
You’re being a pedantic arse.
This post was edited on 6/8/24 at 7:29 pm
Posted on 6/8/24 at 8:04 pm to jangalang
quote:
Of course not
You should've just said this from the start.
quote:
But what you are losing isnt that big of a deal.
Then why did we lose "it?"
Posted on 6/10/24 at 5:05 am to bbvdd
Our gun laws are stupid, anybody who says differently isn’t thinking about it very much. For example, a 9mm carbine is illegal if the barrel is shorter than 16” because you didn’t register it and pay a tax; however, I can have a 9mm pistol that fits in my pocket without registering and paying a tax on it. The short barrel 9mm shoulder fired carbine main use in our society would be home defense, yet it is more difficult to acquire than a 9mm pistol that I can bring into a store without anyone knowing about it.
At the end of the day pistols will always be the most common weapon used in civilian crime because they are concealable and can always be on ones person. However, for some reason the government’s focus is to go after un concealable weapons that are very rarely used in crimes. It’s as if the government is more concerned about an armed rebellion rather than reducing crime. If you think about that, it should scare you.
At the end of the day pistols will always be the most common weapon used in civilian crime because they are concealable and can always be on ones person. However, for some reason the government’s focus is to go after un concealable weapons that are very rarely used in crimes. It’s as if the government is more concerned about an armed rebellion rather than reducing crime. If you think about that, it should scare you.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 5:41 am to cssamerican
quote:
At the end of the day pistols will always be the most common weapon used in civilian crime because they are concealable and can always be on ones person. However, for some reason the government’s focus is to go after un concealable weapons that are very rarely used in crimes.
It is the long con. Anti-rights groups see AR’s as and easy target for legislation because of the coverage of mass shootings.
If you want to really get aggravated go look up how short barreled rifles ended up on the NFA.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 10:20 am to bbvdd
And of course cops are exempt (as usual).
I'm shocked it has a grandfather clause for current "assault" weapons and "high capacity" magazines.
I'm shocked it has a grandfather clause for current "assault" weapons and "high capacity" magazines.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 10:22 am to bbvdd
Sad thing is this could actually happen of Dems keep the senate and nuke the filibuster for legislation.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 4:27 pm to cgrand
quote:
obviously I get what you are trying to say but this in particular is not a winning argument and is disingenuous at best. Nobody (especially not gun owners) is served by semantics of product labeling. Similar to the stupid huffing about “clip” vs “magazine”.
The civilian AR15 in semi auto is for all reasonable purposes identical to the military issue rifle being used in “skirmishes” right this minute. I get that words mean something but in this case, they both mean the same thing
Back to the actual point…
The gas operated civilian semi auto rifle/carbine is here to stay regardless of what individual legislators do or not do. There is no putting that horse back in the barn.
I tend to agree with you. The correct argument is NOT "AR-15s are more similar to Pee-Paw's deer rifle than to an M-16 because they're both semi-auto gas-powered firearms." The correct argument is, "why the frick do you care what's in my closet when it's your kids shooting each other?".
The argument has to be turned back around on them. Your lawn is a mess. Your kids are shooting each other. I am minding my own business. You are a crackpot.
An example: there's a house on Columbia Dr. in Decatur, GA with (among other leftist paraphernalia) a sign reading "Regulate Guns, not Women!". This house and its lawn are completely unkempt and stick out like a sore thumb.
You can't argue with someone like that about categories of firearm action or grenade lugs or whatever. People like that don't care if you've got a SCAR or a Heritage Rough Rider .22LR revolver.
They hate them all, and all of us, and the only discussion I am willing to engage in with them is "mind your own fricking business." Talk about their lawns, their public schools, and so on. Don't skirmish with them deep in our own territory. Take the fight to their territory.
And FWIW yeah, I want the most useful, militarily useful shite possible in a lot of things I buy: vehicles, radios, guns... and yeah, I've got some cool shite. I shouldn't have to pretend it's all "really just like what Pee-Paw had years ago."
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 4:32 pm
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News