Need help with a FB response - Page 2

Need help with a FB response

This is a discussion on Need help with a FB response within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Your current ideas are spot-on. Here is a link with data from NYC talking about how obesity kills significantly more than firearms. Stats if you ...

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 52
Like Tree68Likes

Thread: Need help with a FB response

  1. #16
    Member Array loach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    19
    Your current ideas are spot-on.

    Here is a link with data from NYC talking about how obesity kills significantly more than firearms. Stats if you want them.

    Assault Rifles Kill 5 People Every Year in NY, While Obesity Kills 6,000: Do Gun Bans Make Sense?

    Here is a great youtube video that shows what an assault rifle is not. This police officer takes a simple hunting rifle, swaps the stock and makes it into an ugly black gun. He explains selective versus semi-auto fire.

    The Truth About Semi-Auto Firearms - YouTube

    The LA Riots (Korean shop keepers), Katrina looters and Sandy looters are three recent examples.

    also this link is a collection of flash mob incidents going back to 2002. In 2011 there were many instances of violent mobs that were not reported in the mainstream media. I did a rough estimation on this site and came up with something like 200+ incidents and over 100,000 violent participants if i recall correctly.

    Violent Flash Mobs

    This is what our First President said:

    "A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” – George Washington

    2 sources of fantastic facts, education and info:
    GunCite: gun control and Second Amendment issues
    Gun Facts - Gun Control | Facts | Debunk | Myths

    and the JPFO genocide chart (Jews for the Preservation of Firearms):

    Death by "Gun Control"
    atctimmy likes this.


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array First Sgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florence, SC
    Posts
    7,967
    Try this link which was posted earlier by ccw9mm here on DC.... WHY does anyone NEED an ASSAULT RIFLE? - YouTube
    Sometimes in life you have to stand your ground. It's a hard lesson to learn and even most adults don't get it, but in the end only I can be responsible for my life. If faced with any type of adversity, only I can overcome it. Waiting for someone else to take responsibility is a long fruitless wait.

  3. #18
    VIP Member
    Array msgt/ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    7,478
    Many good points, while I am not sure of the specific bolt-action rifles military snipers use but are they not military style weapons also?
    When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
    "Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."

  4. #19
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,921
    Quote Originally Posted by msgt/ret View Post
    Many good points, while I am not sure of the specific bolt-action rifles military snipers use but are they not military style weapons also?
    Not by any standard that is being used by the politicians.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  5. #20
    VIP Member
    Array ppkheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4,157
    You have a good letter, not really any need for my input. I did remember saving this article and thought I'd pass it along to you, maybe there is something in it that may work for you or just give it to her as a link.

    I AM A PEACEFUL AR-15 ASSAULT RIFLE OWNER - Phoenix Law | Examiner.com
    Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME. Our success in this will be proportional to how hard we work to make it happen.

  6. #21
    Member Array wraithls1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    FL; Palm Bay/Melbourne
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by aus71383 View Post
    Needing the weapon outside of a military setting is the question - and that they belong in the military, not in the streets.

    I would say that any person in a society should be able to support their military or act in its absence if needed. That doesn't mean rifles need to be "in the streets" - but then, nothing is really "in the streets" - that is just a scare tactic phrase used to coerce people and influence their thinking. If the need arises (for whatever reason) for a local group to form a militia and use force to defend their liberty - they must be able to do so. This means owning (responsibly) military type weapons. They don't need to be used every day by every person - maybe not even every decade - but they need to be available, and they need to be owned by free people, not just government agencies. What is responsible gun ownership? It is not accidentally shooting your friends and family, and not "losing" your guns or allowing them to be easily stolen. This is an individual's responsibility and no one else's business.

    As for being "ok" with carrying, but not ok with rifles - where do you draw the line? A person can be one of two things - armed, or unarmed. Now take an armed person - one has a military style rifle, and one has a single action revolver from the mid 19th century. They are both armed - but they are not anywhere near being equally armed. This proposed legislation is clearly an INFRINGEMENT on the rights of the people. There are existing laws which many would argue are infringements as well. My opinion is that anything the military and police have, a person should be able to buy for themselves.

    For me the grey area starts at rocket launchers, mortars, missiles, explosives, etc...

    I didn't proof read this. Just rambling....

    Austin
    I don't see how the last items are a gray area. I feel if you are a sane, law abiding citizen, there should be no reason why you shouldn't have those items.
    If it were to hit the fan, as the second amendment refers to, doesn't the govt already have these? I want an equal playing field.
    "Sooner or later we all must die. Warriors choose to do so on their feet, standing between their enemies and those they hold dear. With a weapon in their hands. Cowards choose to do so on their bellies. Unarmed."

    - Dave Gell

  7. #22
    Member Array skatalite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    184
    Here's one angle I've used when answering such questions, specifically, "Why does anyone need an AR-15? You're not fighting zombies or Soviets." I wrote this last night in response to that exact question, and my friend seemed to appreciate the answer because it's an angle he hadn't considered.

    If you look at the past 60ish years, civilians have been choosing their defensive firearms based on what police are using. For instance, revolvers that shot .38 special ammo were popular in the 1970s and 1980s, because police used them. Then it turned to more modern semi-automatic pistols, like Glocks. Also, shotguns used to be the standard long gun for police, but in the 1990s that changed to the AR-15. The AR-15 is the best-selling rifle in the civilian market, and that's not due to coincidence.

    If the weapon is good enough for police use, then people typically believe it's good enough for personal use. What are the police defending themselves against, anyway? Certainly not zombies or Soviets.
    ppkheat, msgt/ret and atctimmy like this.

  8. #23
    Distinguished Member Array Exacto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,630
    Ask him what he thinks the original intent of the 2A was,hunting, target shooting,or gun collecting.It is to insure that the people have a way of keeping the ones they send to represent us, to work for us, to do our bidding,to not forget who they work for. And if they do forget ,and start to trample on the rights of the people, they have a way to oust them, and to start over. The weapons that we allow the government to have for the common defense cannot out pace the ones the people have to keep them in check. They can have their modern rifles, and we get flintlocks?,I don't think so.It's already way to far out of balance. They fancy themselves the ruling class elite to lord over us, they have forgotten who they work for and why we sent them. It's not a need,it's a necessity to preserve our freedom.
    Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunder bolt...... Sun Tzu.

    The supreme art of war is to defeat the enemy without fighting........ Sun Tzu.

  9. #24
    VIP Member
    Array ppkheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4,157
    In the excerpt of her message to you she puts some emphasis on the "assault weapon" deal which you do address. Here is another link, you might draw from, or just simply send her the link?

    Reasoned Politics: Why Virtually All Gun Owners Oppose A Ban On "Assault Weapons" - And Why You Should Too

    (hmmmm, I've sent you two posts on this, when I just said you had a good letter and didn't need my input)--
    aus71383 likes this.
    Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME. Our success in this will be proportional to how hard we work to make it happen.

  10. #25
    Ex Member Array drinknshoot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Bggest Little City in the World
    Posts
    303
    FB

    is

    Ran by the CIA
    go look it up...

  11. #26
    Senior Member Array 031131's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    nh
    Posts
    1,023
    Quote Originally Posted by buckeye .45 View Post
    There was an armed home invasion down here last week (or maybe the week before), with 6 intruders.

    Edit: also, we don't have military style weapons, those are select fire.
    I'm pretty sure military weapons have different rifling as well. 5 r I think, something like that. I could be wrong though.

  12. #27
    VIP Member Array aus71383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,543
    Quote Originally Posted by wraithls1 View Post
    I don't see how the last items are a gray area. I feel if you are a sane, law abiding citizen, there should be no reason why you shouldn't have those items.
    If it were to hit the fan, as the second amendment refers to, doesn't the govt already have these? I want an equal playing field.
    I agree with you 100%.

    The problem is that now you have to legally define "sane, law abiding citizen" - which is where FFLs, the BATFE, and everything else comes into play. It gets messy real quick. Things that shoot bullets? Easy. Things that shoot projectiles that explode? Less simple....so, grey. I'm not saying I don't think people should be able to buy those things - just how it would work gets complicated. Are you going to order 60mm mortar rounds or cases of C-4 over the internet? Who is going to ship them to you? There are a lot of unknowns in that area.

    Austin

  13. #28
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,721
    Send her this too: The Truth About Assault Weapons

    She has fallen into the MSM hype of "Battlefield Weapons" which are select-fire etc, not semi-auto

  14. #29
    Member Array wraithls1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    FL; Palm Bay/Melbourne
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by aus71383 View Post
    I agree with you 100%.

    The problem is that now you have to legally define "sane, law abiding citizen" - which is where FFLs, the BATFE, and everything else comes into play. It gets messy real quick. Things that shoot bullets? Easy. Things that shoot projectiles that explode? Less simple....so, grey. I'm not saying I don't think people should be able to buy those things - just how it would work gets complicated. Are you going to order 60mm mortar rounds or cases of C-4 over the internet? Who is going to ship them to you? There are a lot of unknowns in that area.

    Austin
    Hell, I think you should be able to pick them up at your local hardware store.

    Seriously, it should be the same as buying a .22 or 30-30 at your local gun store. You give the guy at the gun shop your ID and he calls in the NCIS check. You pass the check, lay down your money and walk out the door with your C4, frag grenade, M203, etc...
    "Sooner or later we all must die. Warriors choose to do so on their feet, standing between their enemies and those they hold dear. With a weapon in their hands. Cowards choose to do so on their bellies. Unarmed."

    - Dave Gell

  15. #30
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    10,770
    What routinely rankles me regarding the "need" question (to wit,"why do 'civilians' need military-style weapons?") is that most of the people asking that question are ignorant of history.

    Throughout the course of American history, it has been the civilian sector which has developed new firearms which the military subsequently adopted. As I have mentioned here many times, a generation before WWII my grandfather hunted deer with a semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine (a .351 Winchester). Civilians developed the revolving cylinder, the self-loading pistol and the lever-action rifle years before the military adopted them. None of those concepts was developed with a Manhattan Project-type of effort owned and funded by the government. Instead, these weapon developments were largely perfected in the civilian marketplace before the inertia-laden military recognized them as good ideas and adopted/modified them for their own use. This is vastly different than heavy tanks, artillery, nuclear weapons and shoulder-launched missiles - all of which were developed specifically for military use.
    Smitty
    NRA Endowment Member

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

korean shopkeepers la riots semi autoatic weapons

,

response to fb post on religion

Click on a term to search for related topics.