ADVERTISEMENT

Biden gets one right.

they won't want to make them if they get sued to hell and back and lose. I mean the gun manufacturers could WIN the case you know.

Removing immunity just allows them to be sued.
I go back to believing that the outcome is almost entirely dependent on where it is tried.
 
I go back to believing that the outcome is almost entirely dependent on where it is tried.
Yes, but using the courts to legislate as opposed to Congress is the new black. So here we are.

Again, almost all of the problems in this country come from two places. An ineffectual, student council vote seeking, dipshit Congress and parenting.

At least we can vote for Congress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory
Gun manufacturers wouldn't have to make complete rifles. They could just make kits without a lower.

Any machine shop could produce stripped lower receivers. Some already do. The lower is the only part required to have a serial # and logo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
I mean, I was rabbit and squirrel hunting by the time I was a teenager. I was shooting rats with a 22 rifle on my uncles hog farm before that. My kids all had the option to shoot by the time they were 13.

Always with the proper safety instructions of course. My mom was INSANE about gun safety and I’m like her.

I guess I’m a gun nut according to your definition.

You think I care about a gun like that? No.

But that gun is really no more dangerous than a shotgun or a 9 mm.

And again, they’re not just coming for that gun. They’re coming for them ALL.

I get the feeling you don’t really care because you have no skin in the game.

Do you own a gun?
Big time post. Adding you to the list
 
  • Love
Reactions: Hoopsdoc1978
You're not cool until you've shot an M1919 .30 cal machine gun your uncle built from a kit and customized a crankfire mechanism for.

Just kidding. Sure was fun though.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
I mean, I was rabbit and squirrel hunting by the time I was a teenager. I was shooting rats with a 22 rifle on my uncles hog farm before that. My kids all had the option to shoot by the time they were 13.

Always with the proper safety instructions of course. My mom was INSANE about gun safety and I’m like her.

I guess I’m a gun nut according to your definition.

You think I care about a gun like that? No.

But that gun is really no more dangerous than a shotgun or a 9 mm.u

And again, they’re not just coming for that gun. They’re coming for them ALL.

I get the feeling you don’t really care because you have no skin in the game.

Do you own a gun?
Same here. My dad had a shotgun and .22 that he let us use to hunt when we were teens. And we always had beagles to hunt rabbits, though have to confess I've never killed one. I was dead-eye with that .22 on fox squirrels, though.

Today, all the guns I own are for hunting (waterfowl, deer, boar, etc.). Of course, they would be setviceable for self defense if needed. But zero interest in an AR or anything similar. Wife wants a handgun for self- defense, so maybe.

My biggest concern is all the novices who bought assault guns and think they're the last line of defense. Wife talks about moving to Canada. I say this is my country and this is where I'll die. Hopefully at a ripe old age, but come what may.
 
Same here. My dad had a shotgun and .22 that he let us use to hunt when we were teens. And we always had beagles to hunt rabbits, though have to confess I've never killed one. I was dead-eye with that .22 on fox squirrels, though.

Today, all the guns I own are for hunting (waterfowl, deer, boar, etc.). Of course, they would be setviceable for self defense if needed. But zero interest in an AR or anything similar. Wife wants a handgun for self- defense, so maybe.

My biggest concern is all the novices who bought assault guns and think they're the last line of defense. Wife talks about moving to Canada. I say this is my country and this is where I'll die. Hopefully at a ripe old age, but come what may.
My uncle told my cousin and me to get our pellet guns and shoot the rats that lived in the rafters of his hog barn. They’d come down and eat the loose feed.

Well, we shot plenty of them but it would just knock ‘em over and they’d squeak for awhile and then go right on about their business. We weren’t even breaking their skin.

My uncle said fine, go get the 22, just make sure you’re not shooting the damn thing at the house. 😂
 
My uncle told my cousin and me to get our pellet guns and shoot the rats that lived in the rafters of his hog barn. They’d come down and eat the loose feed.

Well, we shot plenty of them but it would just knock ‘em over and they’d squeak for awhile and then go right on about their business. We weren’t even breaking their skin.

My uncle said fine, go get the 22, just make sure you’re not shooting the damn thing at the house. 😂
Or the hogs!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Hoopsdoc1978
My uncle told my cousin and me to get our pellet guns and shoot the rats that lived in the rafters of his hog barn. They’d come down and eat the loose feed.

Well, we shot plenty of them but it would just knock ‘em over and they’d squeak for awhile and then go right on about their business. We weren’t even breaking their skin.

My uncle said fine, go get the 22, just make sure you’re not shooting the damn thing at the house. 😂
We used to take my BB gun and shoot at pigeons on my grandfather's barn. It never seemed to affect them, but one time I shot and a pigeon fell to the ground - I'd shot him in the eye.

My grandfather said "Shit, that pigeon was already blind". lol
 
I will answer. Guns are a weird product, the ownership of which is protected by the constitution. There is an inherent bias against guns that is particularly pronounced based on political affiliation in this country. I am not interested in letting a bunch of ambulance chasers have the ability to jury shop in the most liberal parts of the country to basically determine something constitutionally protected to buy. It is just a backdoor attempt to violate rights much like the government's participation in "helping" companies like Twitter violated the first.
Good argument. Think this is the best version of what can be made.

You'd make a good lawyer.
 
nb1776c__2.jpg

Guns-and-Gear-June-22-feature-Hellion.jpg
Looks like it takes you about 6 minutes to log out of one account, back into the other, and then to post?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: UncleMark
Good argument. Think this is the best version of what can be made.

You'd make a good lawyer.

Except 2nd amendment is about well regulated militias..plus there are already bans on some weapons so there is precedent in adding weapons to the ban list. Even if you ignore the well regulated part, no one is talking about taking away all guns.

Plus, conservatives also don't have issue legislating their beliefs on the entire country...or did we forget the abortion issue.

If iucrazy wants to bring up 1st amendment then let's discuss desantis going after disney for using its 1st amendment rights. Twitter is a private company and can ban/silence whoever they want. That isn't a 1st amendment issue like the Disney being revenge legislated by desantis
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC
Except 2nd amendment is about well regulated militias and there are already bans on some weapons so there is precedent in adding weapons to the ban list.

Plus, conservatives also don't have issue legislating their beliefs on the entire country...or did we forget the abortion issue.

If iucrazy wants to bring up 1st amendment then let's discuss desantis removing 1st amendment rights from disney
What weapons are banned? Well regulated in the 18th century didn't mean regulated by the state. Plus you have the Bruen decision now.

Abortion isn't banned. It's back in the hands of states where it belongs. Why is abortion such a heated topic anyway? I personally don't care and would like to see assisted suicide legalized too.
 
It’s called free markets. If people want to make guns, and other people want to buy guns, the price of the gun needs to cover the cost of the goods and the cost of the risk associated with those guns. That’s the way almost all business works.
Really? Does that work for car and knife companies?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
What weapons are banned? Well regulated in the 18th century didn't mean regulated by the state. Plus you have the Bruen decision now.

Abortion isn't banned. It's back in the hands of states where it belongs. Why is abortion such a heated topic anyway? I personally don't care and would like to see assisted suicide legalized too.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban (not in effect anymore)


Why should abortion laws belong to the states? It is quite obvious a federal law is needed given what a bunch of states did after roe vs wade was overturned.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC
Same here. My dad had a shotgun and .22 that he let us use to hunt when we were teens. And we always had beagles to hunt rabbits, though have to confess I've never killed one. I was dead-eye with that .22 on fox squirrels, though.

Today, all the guns I own are for hunting (waterfowl, deer, boar, etc.). Of course, they would be setviceable for self defense if needed. But zero interest in an AR or anything similar. Wife wants a handgun for self- defense, so maybe.

My biggest concern is all the novices who bought assault guns and think they're the last line of defense. Wife talks about moving to Canada. I say this is my country and this is where I'll die. Hopefully at a ripe old age, but come what may.
For me? AR if they’re outside my house. Shotgun if they’re inside. Shoot until I run out of ammo
 
Last edited:
Sir, you shot this guy 49 times, why?

I ran out of bullets.
when my cop buddies were young out getting into fights with bad guys they had this guy who would get super F'd up when his monthly check would come. just bombed. he'd start in on his gf. then she'd flee. then he'd up his intake and take his party outside where he'd stand in the yard and mother f*uck the neighbors from the top of his lungs. finally they'd call the cops and whenever the cops would get there he'd be in the yard with his fists clenched ready to fight. the cops were young and strong and dumb and liked fighting him. guy was real tough but he couldn't take a handful of cops so they'd rough him up. went on like this for months and months. so one month they get the call. load up their cop car with no hubcaps and excitedly head over there to beat on the guy. only when they got there he was out in his yard wearing nothing but tighty whiteys. so they go to arrest him, which means start fighting with him, only they can't get hold of the guy. the guy's got one cop down. pounding him. another cop is sliding off his back. a third cop can't get his arm. it took a good twenty minutes before the cops could get the guy detained. he had covered himself from head to toe in butter. to this day whenever the cops get together for happy hour and recount their record fighting this guy they always say whatever and one.
 
when my cop buddies were young out getting into fights with bad guys they had this guy who would get super F'd up when his monthly check would come. just bombed. he'd start in on his gf. then she'd flee. then he'd up his intake and take his party outside where he'd stand in the yard and mother f*uck the neighbors from the top of his lungs. finally they'd call the cops and whenever the cops would get there he'd be in the yard with his fists clenched ready to fight. the cops were young and strong and dumb and liked fighting him. guy was real tough but he couldn't take a handful of cops so they'd rough him up. went on like this for months and months. so one month they get the call. load up their cop car with no hubcaps and excitedly head over there to beat on the guy. only when they got there he was out in his yard wearing nothing but tighty whiteys. so they go to arrest him, which means start fighting with him, only they can't get hold of the guy. the guy's got one cop down. pounding him. another cop is sliding off his back. a third cop can't get his arm. it took a good twenty minutes before the cops could get the guy detained. he had covered himself from head to toe in butter. to this day whenever the cops get together for happy hour and recount their record fighting this guy they always say whatever and one.
Now that’s some GD determination right there! ( from both sides).
 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban (not in effect anymore)


Why should abortion laws belong to the states? It is quite obvious a federal law is needed given what a bunch of states did after roe vs wade was overturned.
Because it's not written into the Constitution as a right.

I'm not a Constitutional expert, but what is not designated by the Constitution is the right of the States to regulate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cthulhu85
WHO here doesn't know what damage a bullet does. Ranger was on a soap box about this. Nothing more nothing less. "this bullet will kill you, but THIS ONE will tear you up more while it kills you". That was his take. Both end with the same COD.
It's just people with a loud voice, an agenda and no more of a cure than anyone else. With ALL due respect to Ranger of course.
What was my “agenda”?
 
See my post above.

An AR15 is the compromise weapon that mass ownership allows a free people to have a fighting chance should the government unilaterally decide that the rules have changed. It can be used for other things but that is its main social utility. When government fails, when the courts fail, you have the 2nd amendment.

"But they couldn't just own cannons back then Crazy."

Yeah they could.


"Well they just owned single shot muskets and rifles."

Which were the military rifles of their day. It is clear what was intended for the second by the quotes I posted. We have bargained that the populace do not have SAWs or M4's, but the AR15 is the compromise. The killing power is the point.
An AR15 is exactly an M4 without the burst option that nobody used.

Are you proposing we allow private ownership of Reaper drones and M1 tanks and AC-130 gunships? Because we can’t take on the government without them.
 
An AR15 is exactly an M4 without the burst option that nobody used.

Are you proposing we allow private ownership of Reaper drones and M1 tanks and AC-130 gunships? Because we can’t take on the government without them.
I don't like the "we need guns to protect ourselves from the govt" argument. It's not persuasive to me, and I'd be fine with a repeal of the 2nd Am. or an amendment to allow for "reasonable" gun control (reasonable is wide open to interpretation but we use it in the 4th so we could figure it out).

But the Taliban didn't need drones, or tanks, or gunships to eventually take back their country. Perhaps all that argument needs to succeed is enough time and just enough weaponry.
 
An AR15 is exactly an M4 without the burst option that nobody used.

Are you proposing we allow private ownership of Reaper drones and M1 tanks and AC-130 gunships? Because we can’t take on the government without them.
Post more. The board honestly is okay. We need your contribution. Everyone is getting along better. I had a short exchange with Dr Hoops, couple posts, but save that brief departure the board has been pretty good.
 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban (not in effect anymore)


Why should abortion laws belong to the states? It is quite obvious a federal law is needed given what a bunch of states did after roe vs wade was overturned.
And, there’s the problem right there. Thanks Hickory for clearly identifying what the problems of our Country have originated from - allowing the Federal Government to run roughshod right over the citizens of this Country.

You, my friend couldn’t be more wrong and couldn’t have missed our Forefathers vision by a greater mark. Go back to school and dig a little deeper. This experiment was never about the Corporate, but the individual. Never about Central Control, but communities. Read the Federalist Papers, which you’ve probably never even heard of. It’s as clear as day, open your eyes.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC and IU_Hickory
An AR15 is exactly an M4 without the burst option that nobody used.

Are you proposing we allow private ownership of Reaper drones and M1 tanks and AC-130 gunships? Because we can’t take on the government without them.
I don't like the "we need guns to protect ourselves from the govt" argument. It's not persuasive to me, and I'd be fine with a repeal of the 2nd Am. or an amendment to allow for "reasonable" gun control (reasonable is wide open to interpretation but we use it in the 4th so we could figure it out).

But the Taliban didn't need drones, or tanks, or gunships to eventually take back their country. Perhaps all that argument needs to succeed is enough time and just enough weaponry.
F U
 
  • Haha
Reactions: mcmurtry66
Are you proposing we allow private ownership of Reaper drones and M1 tanks and AC-130 gunships? Because we can’t take on the government without them.
Yes, looking to get one. My buddy in Cali has one and it’s awesome!

 
  • Like
Reactions: Cthulhu85
I don't like the "we need guns to protect ourselves from the govt" argument. It's not persuasive to me, and I'd be fine with a repeal of the 2nd Am. or an amendment to allow for "reasonable" gun control (reasonable is wide open to interpretation but we use it in the 4th so we could figure it out).

But the Taliban didn't need drones, or tanks, or gunships to eventually take back their country. Perhaps all that argument needs to succeed is enough time and just enough weaponry.
The Taliban needed time and for the West to get bored and give up. They had RPGs, mines and other anti-armor weaponry when they initially took their country back from a Soviet army. An army that didn’t have kinetic drones.

Like Ukraine, without armor-defeating weaponry, there is no chance.
 
And, there’s the problem right there. Thanks Hickory for clearly identifying what the problems of our Country have originated from - allowing the Federal Government to run roughshod right over the citizens of this Country.

You, my friend couldn’t be more wrong and couldn’t have missed our Forefathers vision by a greater mark. Go back to school and dig a little deeper. This experiment was never about the Corporate, but the individual. Never about Central Control, but communities. Read the Federalist Papers, which you’ve probably never even heard of. It’s as clear as day, open your eyes.
Conservatives are all about the corporate rather than the individual..that is why they are for company bailouts but against anything that helps the individual/needy.

I think you should going back to school. Maybe then you could think outside of the propaganda that you are being fed.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC
An AR15 is exactly an M4 without the burst option that nobody used.

Are you proposing we allow private ownership of Reaper drones and M1 tanks and AC-130 gunships? Because we can’t take on the government without them.
Like @BradStevens said, you don't need that stuff to take on the government. The AR rifles that fire .223 or 5.56 are enough to be problematic in the short term. Reaper drones are unnecessary as the Ukrainians have shown with modified retail drones.

Anything dropping heavy bombs or missiles or firing HE from an armored vehicle would be virtually useless in the type of conflict you would have if the wrong people took over the government. They create too much collateral damage and each person inadvertently killed potentially turns 5 to 10 people against the government.

As I said above, the AR is the compromise for what the founders very clearly believed the second amendment was for. It is to protect the citizens against standing armies. The kind led by Presidents who say you don't need an AR because they have F15's (and would subsequently use those against you should you get too far out of line).
 
Last edited:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban (not in effect anymore)


Why should abortion laws belong to the states? It is quite obvious a federal law is needed given what a bunch of states did after roe vs wade was overturned.
The 1994 AWB didn't effectively ban anything. You could still own and buy pre 94 rifles. The bill only banned some specific brands and models and configurations which was easy to get around. The only ARs you couldn't buy were Colt. Others just renamed theirs from AR15 to XM15 for example and cut off the bayonet lug or added a fixed stock. Because of the AWB everybody wanted one and the parts kit industry exploded. Dems once again the best gun salesmen.

Because the Constitution gives states the ability to govern themselves and represent the interest of their constituents. If you want California shit then move to California.
 
The 1994 AWB didn't effectively ban anything. You could still own and buy pre 94 rifles. The bill only banned some specific brands and models and configurations which was easy to get around. The only ARs you couldn't buy were Colt. Others just renamed theirs from AR15 to XM15 for example and cut off the bayonet lug or added a fixed stock. Because of the AWB everybody wanted one and the parts kit industry exploded. Dems once again the best gun salesmen.

Because the Constitution gives states the ability to govern themselves and represent the interest of their constituents. If you want California shit then move to California.
There’s no better gun salesman in this country than the Democrats.
 
Like @BradStevens said, you don't need that stuff to take on the government. The AR rifles that fire .223 or 5.56 are enough to be problematic in the short term. Reaper drones are unnecessary as the Ukrainians have shown with modified retail drones.

Anything dropping heavy bombs or missiles or firing HE from an armored vehicle would be virtually useless in the type of conflict you would have if the wrong people took over the government. They create too much collateral damage and each person inadvertently killed potentially turns 5 to 10 people against the government.

As I said above, the AR is the compromise for what the founders very clearly believed the second amendment was for. It is to protect the citizens against standing armies. The kind led by Presidents who say you don't need an AR because they have F15's (and would subsequently use those against you should you get too far out of line).
There is no comparing what the Ukrainians are able to do against vastly inferior and poorly maintained opponent weapon systems with what our military can do. Our government can pick people off on a balcony from a de facto unseen drone.

You’re adding illogical platitudes and talking points to an argument that holds no water.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
There is no comparing what the Ukrainians are able to do against vastly inferior and poorly maintained opponent weapon systems with what our military can do. Our government can pick people off on a balcony from a de facto unseen drone.

You’re adding illogical platitudes and talking points to an argument that holds no water.
So what would the US military do when 1/3 to 1/2 their force defects and they are no longer capable of maintaining their combat systems?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT