Points of view regarding guns ownership, understanding and handling.

jet57 said:

Those rifles, including the AR15 are unusually dangerous because of what we've seen in the massacres of late: it is their capacity that carries them over the line and THAT capacity is what put them on the 1994 ban list and will put them there again. YOU only want to interpret all this the way you want it, and that is not how the world works.

I have proven over and over again that said weapons can do much more harm much faster than the rest of the field of firearms. Said weapons were designed for military use, not hunting or varmint eradication. There use in the most heinous massacres in American history is what singles them out. They will be right back on the ban list in due time and the second amendment will not save them.

Click to expand...

Their capacity is the same as your M1 carbine. What else ya got?

jet57 said:

Those rifles, including the AR15 are unusually dangerous because of what we've seen in the massacres of late: it is their capacity that carries them over the line and THAT capacity is what put them on the 1994 ban list and will put them there again. YOU only want to interpret all this the way you want it, and that is not how the world works.

I have proven over and over again that said weapons can do much more harm much faster than the rest of the field of firearms. Said weapons were designed for military use, not hunting or varmint eradication. There use in the most heinous massacres in American history is what singles them out. They will be right back on the ban list in due time and the second amendment will not save them.

Click to expand...

at what magazine round number do they become not unusually dangerous

Using this silly argument of yours-ten round pistols -used by Choi at VT and at Luby's of texas-are unusually dangerous. BTW that is not how the test works

RF667799 said:

Their capacity is the same as your M1 carbine. What else ya got?

Click to expand...

His ludicrous argument is if one gun is used improperly-it is now unusually dangerous but one not chosen for a massacre is ok to own. It is like saying-two cars-each go the same speed, but if the perpetrator of illegal street racing chooses a Ford instead of a Honda, the Ford is banned but the equivalent Honda remains legal.

CLAX1911 said:

I stumbled upon this channel by happenstance. I find myself disagreeing with him a lot, even in this series of videos. But he did bring up some interesting points. And he explains the arguments about the gun itself much better than I ever heard anyone do it.

It's a little long, but it's worth watching.

Click to expand...

I don't care for your posting style 99% of the time and so I gloss over your posts, but this is a good one. I'm in the middle of watching the second video and he's making some good points, like how if you ban semi-autos then full-autos will become more prevalent because if the guys making them illegally are facing the same criminal punishment whether they make a semi-auto or a full-auto, then they're going to make and sell the higher priced full-auto.

His point that ARs are present in crime due to the fact that there's nothing special about the AR at all and that's why everyone has one, is spot on.

His point that if you ban ARs then school shooters will start showing up with the next most popular rifle, the M1 Garand, which is a whole class of hell above the AR, is perfect. There's no hiding behind a classroom door with an M1.

jet57 said:

You've never been able to prove anything.

So, lay out your Heller Paradigm....

Click to expand...

I actually followed the links in his signature months ago and it's very clear that you were talking about long arms generally, not rifles vs shotguns technically. His signature doesn't make the point he thinks it makes.

Second video at 16:23: "It's a lot like outlawing abortion: It doesn't matter what your motives are, the reality is it's gonna happen. It's gonna happen, there's nothing you're going to be able to do to change that. When you make something illegal like that, you're just creating a black market, and what that means is it's going to be the people you don't want, that have the most access."

****in right on!

Only 1 minute in on the 3rd video and I'm ****ing in love with this guy.

3rd video at 05:10: "Let's really think about this. You can be a 'law-abiding gun owner' and be completely complicit in the government's tyranny. In fact, you have to be, if you're a 'law abiding gun owner'. They've got you conditioned to say that. There's no great conspiracy to come take your weapons so you don't fight back against the government, they already know you're not going to, because you're a 'law abiding gun owner'."

I've been saying that since I got here. There will never be a revolt over gun control because if there would be, it would have happened already.

Wayne Jr said:

Second video at 16:23: "It's a lot like outlawing abortion: It doesn't matter what your motives are, the reality is it's gonna happen. It's gonna happen, there's nothing you're going to be able to do to change that. When you make something illegal like that, you're just creating a black market, and what that means is it's going to be the people you don't want, that have the most access."

****in right on!

Click to expand...

This is actually one of the few parts where I disagree with him. Yes, there will be an uptick in black market gun acquisition, because criminals won't be able to obtain them legally - but most people are cowards and aren't going to start dipping their toes into that over not being able to own a AR-15 and 30+ round mag.

This is like the whole **** around the universal healthcare argument - there are literally other developed nations that have already done these things, so fearmongering about stuff like that is just silly.

nekrodev said:

This is actually one of the few parts where I disagree with him. Yes, there will be an uptick in black market gun acquisition, because criminals won't be able to obtain them legally - but most people are cowards and aren't going to start dipping their toes into that over not being able to own a AR-15 and 30+ round mag.

This is like the whole **** around the universal healthcare argument - there are literally other developed nations that have already done these things, so fearmongering about stuff like that is just silly.

Click to expand...

Those other countries didn't have more guns than citizens. We do. We're saturated with guns and that changes the dynamic.

Wayne Jr said:

Those other countries didn't have more guns than citizens. We do. We're saturated with guns and that changes the dynamic.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and I don't personally support banning guns as a first step - but we put ourselves in this situation by not taking care of it sooner.

nekrodev said:

Yeah, and I don't personally support banning guns as a first step - but we put ourselves in this situation by not taking care of it sooner.

Click to expand...

While guns have been with us for a very long time, incidents like mass shootings are a recent occurrence. This mandates that access to guns are not the problem. This is a cultural problem which mere gun control cannot even address let alone solve.

The moment you start talking about gun control is the very moment you STOP looking for a solution.

Regarding the video: raising the purchase age to 21 is not a valid solution because the vast majority of perps stole their firearms from 21+ owners.

Wayne Jr said:

While guns have been with us for a very long time, incidents like mass shootings are a recent occurrence. This mandates that access to guns are not the problem. This is a cultural problem which mere gun control cannot even address let alone solve.

Click to expand...

People focusing on mass shootings so much is a problem in and of itself. They are far too frequent, but a very tiny drop in the bucket compared to murders - and murders have only gone down over the years for the most part, so surely doing something more about guns earlier could have had an effect.

Again, I don't think that pushing for bans on guns, or even specific types of guns, is the best course of action, but the fact that it seems to have worked pretty reliably elsewhere over and over and over seems to indicate that acting on the problem before it's out of control is pretty reliable.

nekrodev said:

People focusing on mass shootings so much is a problem in and of itself. They are far too frequent, but a very tiny drop in the bucket compared to murders - and murders have only gone down over the years for the most part, so surely doing something more about guns earlier could have had an effect.

Again, I don't think that pushing for bans on guns, or even specific types of guns, is the best course of action, but the fact that it seems to have worked pretty reliably elsewhere over and over and over seems to indicate that acting on the problem before it's out of control is pretty reliable.

Click to expand...

It has not worked, tho. The same criminals simply switch to arson.

Gun control did not lower overall crime in those countries. Gun control only switched the weapon of choice among criminals.

That's what we mean when we say 'gun control doesn't work'. Gun control doe not, has not ever, in the history of mankind, lowered overall crime.

Wayne Jr said:

It has not worked, tho. The same criminals simply switch to arson.

Gun control did not a lower crime in those countries. Gun control only switched the weapon of choice among criminals.

That's what me mean when we say 'gun control doesn't work'. Gun control doe not, has not ever, in the history of mankind, lowered overall crime.

Click to expand...

Gun control will not stop crime. No one has ever said that. It reduces the crime and deaths involving guns. All of the people that would have been victims of crimes involving guns do not simply become victims of crimes of other types. Some do, not all, and overall, less people die and society is better off.

Most crime is not murder or anything, so of course getting rid of guns is not going to really have a huge impact on "overall crime", that's a ridiculous point to even try to make.

nekrodev said:

Gun control will not stop crime. No one has ever said that. It reduces the crime and deaths involving guns. All of the people that would have been victims of crimes involving guns do not simply become victims of crimes of other types. Some do, not all, and overall, less people die and society is better off.

Most crime is not murder or anything, so of course getting rid of guns is not going to really have a huge impact on "overall crime", that's a ridiculous point to even try to make.

Click to expand...

All of the people that would have been victims of crimes involving guns simply become victims of crimes of other types of violent crime. Gun control is meaningless. Gun control is a waste of resources and time. Stop focusing of guns of you're actually interested in solving the problem.

Wayne Jr said:

I don't care for your posting style 99% of the time and so I gloss over your posts, but this is a good one.

Click to expand...

I'd prefer you continue to gloss over them including this one. Any interaction I've ever had with you is unpleasant and about like trying to teach a pig how to sing.

I'm in the middle of watching the second video and he's making some good points, like how if you ban semi-autos then full-autos will become more prevalent because if the guys making them illegally are facing the same criminal punishment whether they make a semi-auto or a full-auto, then they're going to make and sell the higher priced full-auto.

His point that ARs are present in crime due to the fact that there's nothing special about the AR at all and that's why everyone has one, is spot on.

His point that if you ban ARs then school shooters will start showing up with the next most popular rifle, the M1 Garand, which is a whole class of hell above the AR, is perfect. There's no hiding behind a classroom door with an M1.

Click to expand...

these are the things that have been repeatedly been told to you over and over and over. Proving you only accepted when it's delivered by someone who you don't have any contact with on the internet.

Please resume glossing over my posts. I take that is far greater of a compliment then you saying "It's a good one."

nekrodev said:

People focusing on mass shootings so much is a problem in and of itself. They are far too frequent, but a very tiny drop in the bucket compared to murders - and murders have only gone down over the years for the most part, so surely doing something more about guns earlier could have had an effect.

Again, I don't think that pushing for bans on guns, or even specific types of guns, is the best course of action, but the fact that it seems to have worked pretty reliably elsewhere over and over and over seems to indicate that acting on the problem before it's out of control is pretty reliable.

Click to expand...

It didn't work reliably elsewhere. Nowhere else is like the United States, nowhere else has the same culture as the United States.

CLAX1911 said:

I'd prefer you continue to gloss over them including this one.

Click to expand...

So here we are on common ground, and you would still refuse me as an ali.

jet57 said:

Those rifles, including the AR15 are unusually dangerous because of what we've seen in the massacres of late:

Click to expand...

then you think the videos are wrong because he says specifically there's me nothing inherently dangerous about the AR-15 it's existed for over a hundred years in some form or another.

it is their capacity that carries them over the line and THAT capacity is what put them on the 1994 ban list and will put them there again.

Click to expand...

no it's proof positive that people that have no idea what they're doing shouldn't be making laws about something they are clueless about.

All the magazine is is a box with a spring in it. it wouldn't matter if he made a law saying they could only have 10 rounds at him or 15 rounds in them or three rounds in them. You would just split the ammo up into different boxes. And changing them out is incredibly fast. Then becomes the ability to carry as many as you want but let's say I want to carry 60 rounds it doesn't matter if it's into magazines or 6 magazines it's the same weight.

YOU only want to interpret all this the way you want it, and that is not how the world works.

Click to expand...

I don't think you have any room to criticize anybody for that. You don't understand what a magazine is and how easily it is to change it quickly long before anyone can Rush a shooter. And you don't know how easy it is to make one.

I have proven over and over again that said weapons can do much more harm much faster than the rest of the field of firearms.

Click to expand...

you cannot prove something that's untrue. an AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle it has the exact same firing rate as a double action revolver or any other semi-automatic firearm ever built on the planet. One trigger pull one fire that's it. if it does any more than that it's classified as a fully automatic firearm it does require much greater licensure to acquire.

so I'm sorry you can't prove that they fire more or that they're more deadly or more dangerous because they don't and they're not. You're not understanding how the world is your only interpreting it how you want it to be.

I know the AR-15 is a scary scary bang bang and I know it makes you wet your little pants but it's just like any other semi-automatic rifle no different in any way outside of some configuring.

Said weapons were designed for military use, not hunting or varmint eradication.

Click to expand...

this is an idiotic argument I do not understand why you insist on making. Duct tape was designed for military use, Jeeps were designed for military use. who cares if civilians use something that was designed for military use? I'm pretty sure there was a toothbrush designed for military use.

There use in the most heinous massacres in American history is what singles them out.

Click to expand...

imagine the shock the most common rifle in the US is used and more shootings than any other rifle. I'm willing to bet the most common toy in the all of the u.s. is responsible for most of the choking related incidents among children in the US.

I'm willing to bet the most common bathtub is normally what people slip in fall in when they slip and fall in the bathtub it's almost like a correlation. Oh wait...

They will be right back on the ban list in due time and the second amendment will not save them.

Click to expand...

AR-15 or any specific firearm was never on the assault weapons banned list. There was never an assault weapons banned list. There was a list of four features that if there were more than two present on a semi-automatic rifle then it was considered an assault weapon. All you have to do is remove or disable two of these four features and your rifle was compliant even if it was an AR-15.

Wayne Jr said:

So here we are on common ground, and you would still refuse me as an ali.

Click to expand...

What common grounds did we find? What specific position did the videos present that I agree with that you also agree with?

Wayne Jr said:

I actually followed the links in his signature months ago and it's very clear that you were talking about long arms generally, not rifles vs shotguns technically. His signature doesn't make the point he thinks it makes.

Click to expand...

No it doesn't. Common sense gets under his skin and he can't deal with it.

CLAX1911 said:

then you think the videos are wrong because he says specifically there's me nothing inherently dangerous about the AR-15 it's existed for over a hundred years in some form or another.

no it's proof positive that people that have no idea what they're doing shouldn't be making laws about something they are clueless about.

All the magazine is is a box with a spring in it. it wouldn't matter if he made a law saying they could only have 10 rounds at him or 15 rounds in them or three rounds in them. You would just split the ammo up into different boxes. And changing them out is incredibly fast. Then becomes the ability to carry as many as you want but let's say I want to carry 60 rounds it doesn't matter if it's into magazines or 6 magazines it's the same weight.



I don't think you have any room to criticize anybody for that. You don't understand what a magazine is and how easily it is to change it quickly long before anyone can Rush a shooter. And you don't know how easy it is to make one.

you cannot prove something that's untrue. an AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle it has the exact same firing rate as a double action revolver or any other semi-automatic firearm ever built on the planet. One trigger pull one fire that's it. if it does any more than that it's classified as a fully automatic firearm it does require much greater licensure to acquire.

so I'm sorry you can't prove that they fire more or that they're more deadly or more dangerous because they don't and they're not. You're not understanding how the world is your only interpreting it how you want it to be.

I know the AR-15 is a scary scary bang bang and I know it makes you wet your little pants but it's just like any other semi-automatic rifle no different in any way outside of some configuring.

this is an idiotic argument I do not understand why you insist on making. Duct tape was designed for military use, Jeeps were designed for military use. who cares if civilians use something that was designed for military use? I'm pretty sure there was a toothbrush designed for military use.

imagine the shock the most common rifle in the US is used and more shootings than any other rifle. I'm willing to bet the most common toy in the all of the u.s. is responsible for most of the choking related incidents among children in the US.

I'm willing to bet the most common bathtub is normally what people slip in fall in when they slip and fall in the bathtub it's almost like a correlation. Oh wait...


AR-15 or any specific firearm was never on the assault weapons banned list. There was never an assault weapons banned list. There was a list of four features that if there were more than two present on a semi-automatic rifle then it was considered an assault weapon. All you have to do is remove or disable two of these four features and your rifle was compliant even if it was an AR-15.

Click to expand...

jet57 said:

Click to expand...

still waiting for you to tell us (use common sense) why an AR 15 should be banned and an MI Carbine should be not


and then tell us why all those other rifles that work just like an AR 15 are not ones you complain about

Beretta AR 70
Steyr AUG
the Arsenal series of AK variations
FN-FAL
FNC
Ruger Mini 14

etc

etc

etc.