Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Because...

It is one of the most effective weapons ever.
It is low cost.
It is fun to shoot.
The ammo used is very effective.
It can be dropped in a mudhole, retrieved, and fired...
There are zillions of them, and most parts will interchange.
They are fun to shoot, especially with the 40 rd mag or 75 rd drum!
They are fun....you can kill a whole army of cans, bottles, plates, etc. Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by Sue Real:
quote:
Originally posted by OkieDokie:
What does one do with such?


Overcompensate.


Listen if you want get down to it no one needs most of the things we purchase.
Who needs a 400hp C6 Corvette, 5000sf home, diamond ring or any jewelry, fancy hand bags, multiple pairs of shoes, Rolex, elective plastic surgery, pleasure boat etc., just the people who buy them.
quote:
You are RIGHT you should buy American my AR15 is a much better choice!!!


Perhaps the Russians agree as well:

quote:
Russia's Defense Minister, Anatoly Serdyukov, set off a firestorm of debate in Russia after saying that his military's pride and joy, the Kalashnikov and Dragunov SVDs sniper rifles, are "morally outdated" and that he's considering a plan to buy foreign-made small arms.

The comments were made during a private meeting with members of the lower house of Russia’s parliament just before the New Year, according to Russian media accounts. Serdyukov introduced the plan to buy foreign-made guns as part of larger military reforms that include buying French-made Mistrall Class helicopter carriers for the Russian navy.
http://www.foxnews.com/politic...ar-replace-famed-ak/

I suspect there are people in the Mexican drug cartels who use too much of their own product. Why would one spend a bunch of Pesos on a more costly smuggled import from the US when there are less costly Chinese and ex-Soviet Bloc weapons floating around?
quote:
Originally posted by OkieDokie:
What does one do with such?


One shoots them! In three-gun events, for example, where semi-auto large caliber rifle, shotgun and large caliber pistols are used.


In short, they are tools used by freemen for any lawful purpose they so choice. A right listed by the bill of rights. What do we do with any of those!
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


But, the problem, Fonzies B1tch, is that is none of your,nor the governments business what kind of firearms I choose to own.
quote:
Originally posted by Stuck-In-Traffic:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


But, the problem, Fonzies B1tch, is that is none of your,nor the governments business what kind of firearms I choose to own.


They took yur jobs...now they're gonna take yur guns. Gun confiscation by the AFUS will be part of the ObamaCare policies to lower gun injuries. The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has been activated, for the first time in 200 years an active military force has been stationed on US soil, for just such a purpose.
quote:
The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?


Sometimes the use of a word changes over time:

quote:
From my reading of material from the colonial era, I have come to
understand that "well regulated militia" had a meaning at that time
(ca. 1789) in the nature of "a properly functioning militia" - which
would mean something along the lines of a properly trained and equipped
militia (since it was common at that time for militiamen to bring their
own firearms, with which they were already proficient.)

The language of the NC Legislature in 1789 strengthens this
interpretation. What can "well regulated Governments" mean other
than "properly functioning Governments"? Surely it didn't and
couldn't refer to a government under the control of man-made laws, for
it is the government itself which makes these laws, and it would neither
be noble nor sensible for the Legislature to be proclaiming that it is
controlling itself.

An additional contemporaneous document which exhibits the same
meaning is the Federalist Paper #29, in which Hamilton is discussing
the composition of the militia and says, "To oblige the great body of
the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under
arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and
evolutions, as often as might be necessary to_acquire_the_degree_of_
perfection_which_would_entitle_them_to_the_character_of_a_
well-regulated_militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a
serious public inconvenience and loss." (emphasis added)

Note that "well-regulated" clearly refers to how well the militia functions and how well trained are the militia members. It does not refer at all to the degree to which the government controls the militia or the members of the militia.
http://yarchive.net/gun/politics/regulate.html

As for the statement "What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.", you might look at the trouble small arms in the hands of insurgents can cause standing armies. Should our corporatist leaders take the next step to the left as seen in the 1930's, those peashooters could be useful.

If there are those who distrust their neighbors owning simple deadly devices as firearms because we have the police and the military to protect us, why not go to the next step? Motor vehicles are more difficult to use safely, they produce a greater death toll, and the populace can always ride a bus.
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


I am not old and who cares what you think we need. Please hold you breath waiting for the 2nd amendment to be changed, I doubt it will ever happen. What happened in New Orleans after the hurricane and in L.A. during the riots is a perfect example of why someone would want a gun for protection. The courts have ruled the police have no responsibility to protect individuals. "no slam against LEOs as most would do everything they could to protect someone".
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1976377/posts
New Orleans Begins Confiscating Firearms as Water Recedes

quote:
Waters were receding across this flood-beaten city today as police officers began confiscating weapons, including legally registered firearms, from civilians in preparation for a mass forced evacuation of the residents still living here.

Police officers looking for survivors today in the Ninth Ward of New Orleans.

No civilians in New Orleans will be allowed to carry pistols, shotguns or other firearms, said P. Edwin Compass III, the superintendent of police. "Only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons," he said


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09...ial/08cnd-storm.html
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


Come and TRY to take mine. Wink
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


I don't 'need' a vehicle capable of speeds in excess of 140mph, either...but I have one. Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


I don't 'need' a vehicle capable of speeds in excess of 140mph, either...but I have one. Big Grin


Are you bragging or complaining?
quote:
Originally posted by HIFLYER2:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


I am not old and who cares what you think we need. Please hold you breath waiting for the 2nd amendment to be changed, I doubt it will ever happen. What happened in New Orleans after the hurricane and in L.A. during the riots is a perfect example of why someone would want a gun for protection. The courts have ruled the police have no responsibility to protect individuals. "no slam against LEOs as most would do everything they could to protect someone".
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1976377/posts


I agree with you there. LEOs are pretty much worthless at protecting others or preventing crime.
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


Come and TRY to take mine. Wink


I seriously doubt this will be a process of collection. They'll be a far more efficient and effective way of surrendering your firearms than that.
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by HIFLYER2:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


I am not old and who cares what you think we need. Please hold you breath waiting for the 2nd amendment to be changed, I doubt it will ever happen. What happened in New Orleans after the hurricane and in L.A. during the riots is a perfect example of why someone would want a gun for protection. The courts have ruled the police have no responsibility to protect individuals. "no slam against LEOs as most would do everything they could to protect someone".
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1976377/posts


I agree with you there. LEOs are pretty much worthless at protecting others or preventing crime.


Per SCOTUS the police, et al, are NOT responsible for protecting individuals or their property. As a former LEO, it is up to US to protect ourselves.
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by HIFLYER2:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


I am not old and who cares what you think we need. Please hold you breath waiting for the 2nd amendment to be changed, I doubt it will ever happen. What happened in New Orleans after the hurricane and in L.A. during the riots is a perfect example of why someone would want a gun for protection. The courts have ruled the police have no responsibility to protect individuals. "no slam against LEOs as most would do everything they could to protect someone".
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1976377/posts


I agree with you there. LEOs are pretty much worthless at protecting others or preventing crime.


You are a jerk, I never said that, most I know and have worked with would put their lives in harms way to help someone. It is simply if they are told to protect a physical location ie city hall or a food distribution point during a catastrophe, they cannot be there to protect a individual. You need to get put on hold if you call 911.
quote:
Originally posted by HIFLYER2:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by HIFLYER2:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
The AK47 and AR15 are the 'Brown Bess' of today. The ONLY thing that keeps a tyrannical government from assuming absolute power is our RIGHT to be armed. Liberals should memorize the definitions of 'rights' and 'infringed'.

Whether they realize it or not, the 2nd Amendment is what gives THEM the rights they enjoy too.


What have you been smoking, a few peashooters in the hands of armchair warriors is no match for the Government's military resources.

The amendment mentions a well regulated militia as the reason for the "right". How do you factor that in?

It's time to amend the 2nd amendment. You old codgers don't need all those guns.


I am not old and who cares what you think we need. Please hold you breath waiting for the 2nd amendment to be changed, I doubt it will ever happen. What happened in New Orleans after the hurricane and in L.A. during the riots is a perfect example of why someone would want a gun for protection. The courts have ruled the police have no responsibility to protect individuals. "no slam against LEOs as most would do everything they could to protect someone".
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1976377/posts


I agree with you there. LEOs are pretty much worthless at protecting others or preventing crime.


You are a jerk, I never said that, most I know and have worked with would put their lives in harms way to help someone. It is simply if they are told to protect a physical location ie city hall or a food distribution point during a catastrophe, they cannot be there to protect a individual. You need to get put on hold if you call 911.


Get a grip. LEOs just complete paperwork following a crime. They in no way prevent crime.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×