Opinion on AR ownership

Mattval

Senior Member
It seems to me that gun owners always have to give up something. Always. I say no more!. We cannot compromise on anything else. An AR is just a rifle. A Semi-Automatic rifle. We have been shooting semi autos for 100 years.
 

rosewood

Senior Member
I should have clearer . Compassionate about trying to stop gun violence . .
There is no such thing as "gun violence". There is violence. If you are attacked with a car, knife, baseball bat or gun, you are still attacked and can be killed. Tagging the weapon is projection. Never hear of a stabbing as "knife violence".

Rosewood
 

rosewood

Senior Member
It's not take seriously but the American Indians are a perfect example of governmental incrementalism. Lots and lots of treaties were signed and all were broken. The Cherokee nation right here in north GA is a perfect example. They submitted in everyway and were still kicked off their land leading to the trail of tears march.
And they took their guns.
 

flynlow

Student at the Hard Knock School of Aerodynamics
It seems to me that gun owners always have to give up something. Always. I say no more!. We cannot compromise on anything else. An AR is just a rifle. A Semi-Automatic rifle. We have been shooting semi autos for 100 years.
This from an educated person on firearms. An uneducated person who could care less what any of it means simply sees it as an evil looking assault weapon that could attack you on it's own if you just look at it wrong...plus they have an agenda to disarm you in the name of common sense gun laws because they believe no one should be allowed to own an "assault rifle" of any kind as they serve no purpose other than to cause "gun violence."
 

rosewood

Senior Member
The problem with "common sense" gun laws is they are not common sense. Those pushing that agenda refuse to exercise logic and common sense and base their beliefs on lies and fear, and then those are those that just want to control us.
 
Everyone has a right to defend themselves. Rifles are self-defense tools. This is naturally based and common sense. People who have ideas about regulating firearms are either ignorant, confused or worse. Of course, we live in a society where people generally supported imprisoning someone for resisting arrest and keeping them there longer if they try to escape. Nuts!

The 2A thing is something else. For this country to work as designed we need the tools of rebellion. An AR is just the tip of the iceberg. The battle was already fought, though. So, here we are.
 
The NRA and Trump have worked to chip away more of our 2A rights than Obama did in 8 years. Who would have thought?
 

rosewood

Senior Member
Yes, please give examples. I need to know what to complain about to my congressman and to the NRA leadership.

Rosewood
 

krizia829

Senior Member
Regulating the ownership of an AR is just the beginning. First they regulate the AR's, then they regulate everything else. An AR is no different than an AK, than a KSG shotgun, Mini-14, Glock 19 etc. It is a tool that was made to fire a projectile. It may look different but it has the same purpose as any other firearm in existence. It was not made as a killing machine. The uneducated are going off of what they see in movies and what the liberals and the media are saying. I say **** No to regulating AR ownership or even requiring a permit to have or purchase one. The government will make things impossible for us law abiding citizens with our firearms little by little until they have full control and we become a country similar to Venezuela, Cuba, etc.

They start with magazine capacity, then grips, then stocks, magazine release buttons, until you basically can't have one period. All it takes is one idiot who has a personal problem to enter a place and do a massacre. Because of the handful of people who have done such things, we as law abiding citizens are the ones suffering. We have the right to keep and bear arms and that's it. No ifs ands or buts.

Take Chicago for example. They have some of the strictest gun laws in the entire country and they have the highest crime and murder rates! Why? Because they cannot own such firearms. There is a city in GA (Kennesaw) that makes it mandatory for every head of the household to have a firearm in their residence. What did that do? Prove that having a gun (not even using it!!) prevents crimes and murders!!

This is a very touchy subject and I can go on and on about it but it's up to you to decide on how you want to talk to others about it. Unfortunately, those in congress are the ones who want to take these rights away from us but it's up to us to defend what our founding fathers brought upon in this country! Take advantage of your first amendment right and use it!
 
Say what? I'm asking because I'm trying to understand what you mean, and with specific facts to back your claim.
The recent ban on bump stocks, which the NRA basically called for, and import restrictions which affected some rifles coming in.
 

flynlow

Student at the Hard Knock School of Aerodynamics
The recent ban on bump stocks, which the NRA basically called for, and import restrictions which affected some rifles coming in.
As brought up by another thread, bump stocks are near useless gadgets and banning them has basically zero to do with 2A rights or your ability to buy/own an AR. As for some rifles being restricted, this is nothing new either and has been going on for years...Clinton comes to mind.
 
Last edited:
Me or you liking bump stocks has nothing to do with it. The fact is, banning them was another piece of the pie and the NRA supported it. My opinion of them is about the same as yours, but I'm not one who thinks bans are ok as long as it doesn't affect anything I like.
 
Me or you liking bump stocks has nothing to do with it. The fact is, banning them was another piece of the pie and the NRA supported it. My opinion of them is about the same as yours, but I'm not one who thinks bans are ok as long as it doesn't affect anything I like.
Bump stocks were made as an attempt to circumvent the NFA rules , basically mimicking full auto fire by way of an accessory, the NFA rules were already in place, have been for a long time, in my view a ban on bump stocks didn't add anything new, while I believe we should be able to own fully automatic weapons if we choose, we'd have to change an existing law in order to do that. And restrictions on importation of certain weapons has been around since the Clinton days, again, nothing new.

The only thing Trump has done that has anything to do with 2a , is the demand is down for firearms, and ammunition, so he technically has financially hurt the Arms manufacturers and ammo makers, but not the general public as far as I'm concerned, Ammo is cheaper now than it has been in years.
 
Again, like them or not, they didn't change the way an AR functioned nor its rate of fire (1 round per pull of the trigger). They simply allowed the shooter to pull the trigger faster. There are other "accessories" other than bump stocks that do the same thing but those are ok? What about pistol braces? The door is open now, what's next?

If you don't see the ban on them as a negative thing you are part of the problem.
 
Last edited:

rosewood

Senior Member
Much like bumpstocks, pistol braces are an attempt to get around the NFA rules. I still don't understand how the pistol braces are getting by. Granted, i think the NFA restrictions on full automatic, short barrel etc is stupid and pointless and does nothing for safety.

To solve the mass shooting issue, we need to hang the perps from the lamp post for everyone to see with a bag on their head so no one knows their name. Once the notoriety is gone and the punishment is clear, a lot of this crap will stop. Dems don't want to punish the perps, they want to punish the honest gun owners especially since most of us don't vote for them anyway.

Rosewood
 

tr21

Senior Member
if you want to see the crime stop then make it so that EVERYONE over 21 MUST own and carry a gun. it wont take long before the criminals are either killed off or decide it aint worth it and get a honest job. its obvious that the laws and law enforcement just cant get it done, and if a officer must draw and shoot and the criminal isn't DRT, he or she is fired. no more johnny was a good boy , they didn't have to kills him :cry: he's only kilt 3 people and been in jeal fo 10 yrs :eek:.. it needs to end.... and I own 3 AR's and 3 AK's
 
if you want to see the crime stop then make it so that EVERYONE over 21 MUST own and carry a gun. it wont take long before the criminals are either killed off or decide it aint worth it and get a honest job. its obvious that the laws and law enforcement just cant get it done, and if a officer must draw and shoot and the criminal isn't DRT, he or she is fired. no more johnny was a good boy , they didn't have to kills him :cry: he's only kilt 3 people and been in jeal fo 10 yrs :eek:.. it needs to end.... and I own 3 AR's and 3 AK's
I like the concept, problem is, all cops cannot be trusted. Statistically, cops are more likely to commit a crime than those of us that have concealed carry permits.

Also, there are a lot of incompetent people out there I am glad are not carrying.

Rosewood
 
Top