• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A message from a veteran about the AR-15

I'm a vehement supporter of the Castle Doctrine and the efficacy of firearms in home defense.

But have you ever considered a dog? Preferable two?

I've got two, they're amazing alerters, and quite honestly even though they're not the biggest, I do believe they and their rukus are enough to get most random trouble-makers to pick another easier to breach domicile. Once they get going, I swear you'd think I have a wolfpack in here!

Just thought I'd mention it. The idea being of course rather than to shoot in self-defense, to hopefully *not* have to shoot in self-defense! ;)

I agree that dogs certainly make a great first line of defense. But my wife is severely allergic. Good guard cats are harder to come by. :)
 
There is absolutely no valid reason to deprive law abiding civilians military grade killing machines. They aren't the problem.



Oh. NRA propaganda hasn't changed since the 60's. "Gun don't kill people." Well neither do cars, but you need to be a certain age and know the basics before you can. Here it's a three year process. And cars can't re-load, they get one run. How many times did this guy have to re-load? And you suggest this weapon is for hunting....my ass!

At some point Americans will have to ask themselves "how come we have more murders than any other developed country? Is it because there's something wrong with Americans? They are mentally unfit in some way and the weapons are innocent? For **** sakes, there's a war going on, and while you all cower and fear at the created enemy of "terrorism", while you're killing each other. The pile of bodies grows and you all just keep making the same arguments about a stupid idea that no founding father ever thought would lead to this. It's time to come out of the 18th century.

I am sorry to have to tell you this, but anyone who has to live in fear and arm himself against his neighbors is NOT free. Freedom is being able to walk out my front door and go into any neighborhood any time I like. Free is being able to chose NOT to lock my door.

There are two basic problems in America: The gun lobby and the tobacco industry. Both ate killing you in the name of profits.
 
I agree that dogs certainly make a great first line of defense. But my wife is severely allergic. Good guard cats are harder to come by. :)
Ah, well then hopefully she's not allergic to gunpowder! :mrgreen:

But FWIW, poodles are nearly hypoallergenic, are great alerters, and pretty staunch fighters too. And standards come up to maybe 60-65 lbs if you look around.
 
I am a veteran of the United States Army. I served as a 12B (Combat Engineer) in the 37th Engineer Battalion, part of the illustrious 82nd Airborne Division

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs or wants to own an assault rifle. During OSUT (a form of initial training where Basic and AIT are rolled into one course), we learned that our rifles were deadly weapons, designed solely for killing the enemy on a battlefield. When we trained with our weapons, we had to shoot a "qualification" test. We were presented with forty popup targets, one after another at different distances, from fifty to three hundred meters, all in very quick succession. We had to kill at least twenty three targets to pass the test, but most of us, including those of us who never fired a gun before, easily shot thirty or more targets. All this was in the span of less than two minutes, and we even had to reload once in that time. I don't get why any civilian needs to kill thirty people in two minutes, unless he is deliberately causing carnage and mass death.

The civilian AR15 is just a M-4 carbine by any other name. The only difference is that it does not have burst capacity. That is not nearly as big a difference as the NRA makes it out to be. We never, ever used burst mode in the military, since it wasted ammo, was inaccurate, and generally useless. Besides for that difference, the AR 15 is the exact same as the M4. The M4's features are designed to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, including a detachable magazine which allows for rapid reloading and a buffer tube and muzzle brake which dampens recoil, so that a shooter can fire off a large number of rounds with minimal affect on accuracy.

All the arguments about " I need my AR 15 for hunting" or "I need my Ar15 for self defense" are entirely ridiculous. The 5.56 Nato round, which the Ar15 uses, is designed to pierce body armor. Which deer wears body armor? And your fantasies about shooting fifteen home invaders at once is just that: a fantasy which will likely never happen. The only real purpose of the AR 15 in American society is to kill large numbers of clubgoers, schoolchildren, or innocent bystanders at a time.

And for those of you who claim that "my Ar15 will protect me from tyranny," guess what, you're wrong. In my time in the military, I saw that no civilian rebellion would ever stand a chance against us. We have M1 Abrams tanks which can survive multiple rocket hits. We have drones which can bomb your house while being controlled by a person a thousand miles away. If worst came to worst, we have nuclear weapons which can quickly bring a seceding city or state into the stone age.

The right wing claims to respect veterans, so please listen to the words of a former soldier. I trained with assault rifles. I carried an assault rifle as part of my job. I can tell you that the military M-4 and the Ar-15 are nearly identical, and that no civilian needs a weapon designed to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes.

Some want it for the same reason they want to a $120,000 Sports car....Penis Extenders! I personally would love to own a GAU 8 Avenger...If I could afford it or was available for sale or me mount it on my car!

Diving Mullah
 
Some want it for the same reason they want to a $120,000 Sports car....Penis Extenders! I personally would love to own a GAU 8 Avenger...If I could afford it or was available for sale or me mount it on my car!

Diving Mullah

You hit a point there. It is very likely that AR15 owners choose to own such a deadly weapon to compensate for something else.
 
Oh. NRA propaganda hasn't changed since the 60's. "Gun don't kill people." Well neither do cars, but you need to be a certain age and know the basics before you can. Here it's a three year process. And cars can't re-load, they get one run. How many times did this guy have to re-load? And you suggest this weapon is for hunting....my ass!

At some point Americans will have to ask themselves "how come we have more murders than any other developed country? Is it because there's something wrong with Americans? They are mentally unfit in some way and the weapons are innocent? For **** sakes, there's a war going on, and while you all cower and fear at the created enemy of "terrorism", while you're killing each other. The pile of bodies grows and you all just keep making the same arguments about a stupid idea that no founding father ever thought would lead to this. It's time to come out of the 18th century.

I am sorry to have to tell you this, but anyone who has to live in fear and arm himself against his neighbors is NOT free. Freedom is being able to walk out my front door and go into any neighborhood any time I like. Free is being able to chose NOT to lock my door.

There are two basic problems in America: The gun lobby and the tobacco industry. Both ate killing you in the name of profits.

Thank you for being the voice of reason here. There is no reason a civilian should have the "right" to own a killing machine designed to end dozens of lives in a minute. True freedom includes the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The extreme gun culture in this country threatens all of those rights.

When it is easier to buy an AR 15 with a 100 round magazine than it is to buy a car in this country, something is very, very wrong.
 
It goes further than not wanting to own one. It is about not wanting any innocent civilian, like the 50 people recently killed in Orlando, to be shot with one.

Something like 90 a day or week die in auto accidents in the US. Shall we make cars illegal?
 
Oh. NRA propaganda hasn't changed since the 60's. "Gun don't kill people." Well neither do cars, but you need to be a certain age and know the basics before you can. Here it's a three year process. And cars can't re-load, they get one run. How many times did this guy have to re-load? And you suggest this weapon is for hunting....my ass!

At some point Americans will have to ask themselves "how come we have more murders than any other developed country? Is it because there's something wrong with Americans? They are mentally unfit in some way and the weapons are innocent? For **** sakes, there's a war going on, and while you all cower and fear at the created enemy of "terrorism", while you're killing each other. The pile of bodies grows and you all just keep making the same arguments about a stupid idea that no founding father ever thought would lead to this. It's time to come out of the 18th century.

I am sorry to have to tell you this, but anyone who has to live in fear and arm himself against his neighbors is NOT free. Freedom is being able to walk out my front door and go into any neighborhood any time I like. Free is being able to chose NOT to lock my door.

There are two basic problems in America: The gun lobby and the tobacco industry. Both ate killing you in the name of profits.

Never suggested the weapon is for hunting (though I know other have). There are far better weapons for hunting and yeah I have all of those too.

This living in fear thing... it's way blown out of proportion.

Bottom line is I enjoy firearms, I'm not going to do anything evil with them and I don't see any reason I should give them up because some people do evil things with them. I'm all for finding some way to keep them out of the hands of the wrong people, but I'm not willing to sacrifice my guns for it.
 
You hit a point there. It is very likely that AR15 owners choose to own such a deadly weapon to compensate for something else.

Keep telling yourself that.
 
Never suggested the weapon is for hunting (though I know other have). There are far better weapons for hunting and yeah I have all of those too.

This living in fear thing... it's way blown out of proportion.

Bottom line is I enjoy firearms, I'm not going to do anything evil with them and I don't see any reason I should give them up because some people do evil things with them. I'm all for finding some way to keep them out of the hands of the wrong people, but I'm not willing to sacrifice my guns for it.

Guess who else said they weren't going to do anything evil with their firearms? Adam Lanza. Omar Matteen. Dylan Roof. Micah Johnson.
 
Something like 90 a day or week die in auto accidents in the US. Shall we make cars illegal?

Cars are needed for transit, and without them, our entire economy would collapse.

AR15's serve no use in society. There is no reason they should be legal for civilians.
 
Cars are needed for transit, and without them, our entire economy would collapse.

AR15's serve no use in society. There is no reason they should be legal for civilians.

Who gets to determine what is useful and what is not? I hope not you.....;)
 
Who gets to determine what is useful and what is not? I hope not you.....;)

Common sense, most likely. If you can do the same thing your AR15 does with a double barrel shotgun, a bolt action rifle, or a tazer or pepper spray, then there is no reason to own a weapon which has tons of added features designed solely to facilitate the killing of large numbers of people.
 
I agree that dogs certainly make a great first line of defense. But my wife is severely allergic. Good guard cats are harder to come by. :)

My resident attack cat (Naughty) will be more than happy to swat at the ankles of any and all intruders.
 
Last edited:
Who gets to determine what is useful and what is not? I hope not you.....;)

Use is one of those things that ought to be left to the individual to decide.
 
Common sense, most likely. If you can do the same thing your AR15 does with a double barrel shotgun, a bolt action rifle, or a tazer or pepper spray, then there is no reason to own a weapon which has tons of added features designed solely to facilitate the killing of large numbers of people.

Whose common sense?
 
Common sense, most likely. If you can do the same thing your AR15 does with a double barrel shotgun, a bolt action rifle, or a tazer or pepper spray, then there is no reason to own a weapon which has tons of added features designed solely to facilitate the killing of large numbers of people.

Well all that is true, but fairly well irrelevant.

You want somebody to decide what the public can have and what it cannot have. That is an authoritarian viewpoint, and not common sense at all.
 
Well all that is true, but fairly well irrelevant.

You want somebody to decide what the public can have and what it cannot have. That is an authoritarian viewpoint, and not common sense at all.

Authoritarian doesn't automatically equal bad. A strong government with the authority to help the people is better than a weak government which stands idly by while 32,000 people are shot to death a year
 
Authoritarian doesn't automatically equal bad. A strong government with the authority to help the people is better than a weak government which stands idly by while 32,000 people are shot to death a year

It would be nice if mental health issues with depression were addressed, 22,000 by suicide is too many. Then the government needs to deal with urban poor areas and gang issues and try and address some of the root causes and find some way to turn those communities around. Banning guns isn't going to solve either of these problems.
 
Authoritarian doesn't automatically equal bad. A strong government with the authority to help the people is better than a weak government which stands idly by while 32,000 people are shot to death a year

Rights and freedoms are worth the deaths.
 
300 yards is the norm for the M16 and M4, a pretty good long limit for most shooters. The M14 has that nice 7.62 NATO/.308 round that can reach out far further and touch someone, but you do add more weight and get fewer rounds so it is a tradeoff.

200, 300 and 500 here. USMC.
 
Never suggested the weapon is for hunting (though I know other have). There are far better weapons for hunting and yeah I have all of those too.

This living in fear thing... it's way blown out of proportion.

Bottom line is I enjoy firearms, I'm not going to do anything evil with them and I don't see any reason I should give them up because some people do evil things with them. I'm all for finding some way to keep them out of the hands of the wrong people, but I'm not willing to sacrifice my guns for it.


If you as a nation are not living in fear why do so, so many right wingers insist on their "right" to protect their property. Every ****ing time there's a serial or mass killing, which is becoming weekly, the right jumps up and screams 'we need more guns' to prevent it. Why are there so many right wingers insisting on open carry? To "protect themselves"

Which means they're frightened of something.

For the record my father was a federal gun dealer and collector who machined his own Colt model 1911 .45. I have hunted deer, moose, bear and caribou. And I know the only use of an AR-15 is to kill people.

So fight for the right for mentally ill nut bars to slaughter people, based on a long obsolete idea of a band of wigged millionaires
 
If you as a nation are not living in fear why do so, so many right wingers insist on their "right" to protect their property. Every ****ing time there's a serial or mass killing, which is becoming weekly, the right jumps up and screams 'we need more guns' to prevent it. Why are there so many right wingers insisting on open carry? To "protect themselves"

Now see? This is what spin and hyperbole will get you: misinformation.

Fact is, every time there is a serial or mass killing the right says NOTHING about "we need more guns". They DO say we don't need to take guns away from law-abiding citizens. They DO say we should have the ability to protect ourselves.

On the other hand, every time this sort of thing happens, the left DO jump up and say we need to take guns away from law-abiding citizens. They DO want to prevent people from being able to protect themselves.

Why...it really does seem like the left wants MORE people to die, doesn't it?
 
If you as a nation are not living in fear why do so, so many right wingers insist on their "right" to protect their property. Every ****ing time there's a serial or mass killing, which is becoming weekly, the right jumps up and screams 'we need more guns' to prevent it. Why are there so many right wingers insisting on open carry? To "protect themselves"

Which means they're frightened of something.

For the record my father was a federal gun dealer and collector who machined his own Colt model 1911 .45. I have hunted deer, moose, bear and caribou. And I know the only use of an AR-15 is to kill people.

So fight for the right for mentally ill nut bars to slaughter people, based on a long obsolete idea of a band of wigged millionaires

It's pretty simple, we love our guns and our constitutional right to own them. Freedom comes with a cost, a cost we are willing to pay.
 
Back
Top Bottom