Downtown “Funky Stuff” Malone🍆
Verified Military
This one was just funny.
United States & Gun Control discussion.
- Thread starter Diamondback 2/2
- Start date
DocIllinois
Verified Military
I don't know that I'd agree with civilians possessing weapons that are identical to those for military use. Perhaps this fleshes out what I mean by that a bit better.
I realize that those platforms can be altered to make them something altogether different in terms of their damaging effects. And to that I say - sounds great. Folks who don't need to kill people effectively don't require guns that do, IMO. Unless there really is a genuine need for such weapons to be available to civilians in the US, in which case I'm way off base here.
ThunderHorse
Verified Military
Considering almost every firearm other than Fowling rifles was meant for war, this really doesn't make sense.
Well, when you go hog hunting--like my bros S/Sgt Seals and Captain Fitch, here--and you run into a whole herd of hogs, you can get more kills with high cap mags.
Not only that, but they are fun to shoot, as I am doing, below...
...and as my son is doing here...
You're a good man, Doc, hang in there.
ThunderHorse
Verified Military
They also help you not die in that situation.
Yeah, you get a wounded 250 lb boar coming at you, you better hope you can keep pulling that trigger.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,304
I could go with that.
I find it bothersome as a grunt 19/20 years old I could drive an LAV and carry the M16A2 but could not drink (legally of course).
I think...I couldn't even rent a car until I was 25?.
DocIllinois
Verified Military
Well, when you go hog hunting--like my bros S/Sgt Seals and Captain Fitch, here--and you run into a whole herd of hogs, you can get more kills with high cap mags.
View attachment 21674
Not only that, but they are fun to shoot, as I am doing, below...
View attachment 21675
...and as my son is doing here...
View attachment 21676
You're a good man, Doc, hang in there.
Much appreciated.
For a debate that needed to be many against one and was destined to go nowhere at all, it was some good fun.
Much appreciated.
For a debate that needed to be many against one and was destined to go nowhere at all, it was some good fun.
Shadowspear is a great place for respectful, friendly debate.
Armed roberies in 97, may have risen, but only 24% were carried out with firearms, 0.7% of assaults were carried out with firearms, only 23% of murders and 28% of attempted murders were carried out with firearms and there were no stats for home invasions, but for burglery, most tea leafs are little indiginous kids and local drug addicts who don't enter houses that are occupied, so they don't care if the home owner is armed or not.
The nice tight shot of a couple of houses with fences probably indicates that the rest of the street had the normal low brick wall/picket fence/border garden/etc that you see around the place, due to the general lack of crime...
The ban hasn't been effective, because there wasn't a problem in the first place. Very little gun crime occured in the first place, and even less of that happened with registered firearms. The law abiding handed them in and then went and bought new firearms that they could legally own on their existing licences with their generous compensation pay outs. We rapidly got to the point where we had more registered firearms in the country than we had in early 1996 before the ban.
I have my semiautomatic rifle. It's a mean scary black rifle, same thing that some good units have used to good effect making canoes out of skulls in the defense of our nation. It's box mag fed. It'll kill anything on this continent with reasonable shot placement and run-of-the-mill bullet construction. It'll kill anything on the planet with specific shot placement and bullet construction considerations included in the decision.
That's why I have it.
I can go straight from plinking at the range, to a 3 gun competition, to hunting, and still be good back home if a tweaker decides to come through the door uninvited. It's simple and fun enough that my daughter can shoot it with instruction at 6 years old, and my 70 year old mother can happily embarrass her brother in the marksmanship department with it.
Worst case, I can fulfill my duties and responsibilities inherent to the very section of Title 10 US Code that references a very specific portion within the 2nd Amendment. Anyone that doesn't know what I'm talking about should take a gander at Title 10.
The whole basis for liberty does not include the relinquishment of responsibility. Every police officer here will admit that there is an unavoidable delay between when you call for help and when help gets there. Why wouldn't I want to be able to buffer that timeframe with the same grade of equipment that they will bring?
Anyone who thinks that banning firearms is a viable, functional, coherent and competent concept towards prevention of any events in the past 20 years is deluding themselves.
We have track records showing specifically how the government that everyone anti-gun wants to empower as the sole source provider of threat/use of lethal force flat fucking falls on their face when put to task with using that power to protect the people.
The same government entities that you want to have that monopoly on lethal force, are the same exact entities that up until the television cameras panned right onto the next crisis not to waste, that nationwide protests and investigations were focused on. What happened to all that outcry? Why isn't there even more now, when we have solid data that from reporting a threat to reporting an ongoing incident, they failed to respond in ANY manner honestly effective?
Joe shitbird the school shooter shouldn't have been able to get a firearm. He shouldn't have been able to get a drink of fucking water without having to be hand held while doing the thorazine shuffle, yet he was. Why? Because the GOVERNMENT didn't do their job.
Functionally, gun grabbers are wanting all medicines to be prescription only, and the only place you can go to try to get help is from the VA Doctor in town that's had more malpractice suits than cases with effective treatment.
That's why I have it.
I can go straight from plinking at the range, to a 3 gun competition, to hunting, and still be good back home if a tweaker decides to come through the door uninvited. It's simple and fun enough that my daughter can shoot it with instruction at 6 years old, and my 70 year old mother can happily embarrass her brother in the marksmanship department with it.
Worst case, I can fulfill my duties and responsibilities inherent to the very section of Title 10 US Code that references a very specific portion within the 2nd Amendment. Anyone that doesn't know what I'm talking about should take a gander at Title 10.
The whole basis for liberty does not include the relinquishment of responsibility. Every police officer here will admit that there is an unavoidable delay between when you call for help and when help gets there. Why wouldn't I want to be able to buffer that timeframe with the same grade of equipment that they will bring?
Anyone who thinks that banning firearms is a viable, functional, coherent and competent concept towards prevention of any events in the past 20 years is deluding themselves.
We have track records showing specifically how the government that everyone anti-gun wants to empower as the sole source provider of threat/use of lethal force flat fucking falls on their face when put to task with using that power to protect the people.
The same government entities that you want to have that monopoly on lethal force, are the same exact entities that up until the television cameras panned right onto the next crisis not to waste, that nationwide protests and investigations were focused on. What happened to all that outcry? Why isn't there even more now, when we have solid data that from reporting a threat to reporting an ongoing incident, they failed to respond in ANY manner honestly effective?
Joe shitbird the school shooter shouldn't have been able to get a firearm. He shouldn't have been able to get a drink of fucking water without having to be hand held while doing the thorazine shuffle, yet he was. Why? Because the GOVERNMENT didn't do their job.
Functionally, gun grabbers are wanting all medicines to be prescription only, and the only place you can go to try to get help is from the VA Doctor in town that's had more malpractice suits than cases with effective treatment.
Last edited:
policemedic
Verified SWAT
I’m not sure I was clear in my earlier post. When I said functionally identical (semi-automatic, .223 Remington or 5.56 NATO, magazine fed, 16” barrel) I wasn’t speaking of civilian AR-15s. I was referring to things like the Ruger Mini-14, which has never been used by a military force that I’m aware of. Does that change your opinion on whether it should be available to the public?
You’re incorrect when you say the M4/M16/AR-15 platform can be modified to change its damaging effects. A .223 round fired from any 14” or 16” or 20” barrel is going to produce the same terminal ballistics regardless of whether the rifle has an NSN assigned or has a polished walnut stock.
You speak of need, which makes me wonder about how you define rights. Rights are inalienable and exist independent of need. Rights needn’t be justified. This is especially true in the context of the Second Amendment, which recognizes our right to self-defense against criminals as well as our duty to defend the country against foreign invasion and internal tyranny.
To suggest the 1911 should be banned because of its military heritage but a Glock 30 or HK45 Compact should not (all of which fire the same round) goes beyond logic and exceeds what even most ardent gun control groups advocate for. These are low-capacity guns, after all, not high capacity ‘military designed battlefield pistols’ like the Glock 17/19. Of course, you may believe these guns should also be banned and that’s your right. However, the SCOTUS disagrees with that view.
They have held that the interest is in prohibiting unusual and dangerous arms. A handgun design in use for more than 100 years is neither. The civilian AR-15 is an incredibly popular design; it is not unusual or uncommon and the design is no more dangerous than other rifles firing the same cartridge.
I’m not trying to dogpile, because I am interested in why you think the way you do despite (because?) being on the opposite end of the spectrum on this topic. However, @Ranger Psych is right—the police are not there to protect you and it isn’t even our job. Self-protection is your own responsibility, and every (law abiding, mentally stable) citizen deserves an efficient means of doing that.
@Ranger Psych , good post. Which part of Title 10 USC were you referring to, specifically?
10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia: composition and classes
(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1)the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2)the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
While it's an absolute oh-shit scenario... it's still law. When you further look at when the amendments were written, private citizens had repeating rifles (while not as good as we have it today), flat out warships, field artillery, and private armies.
The latter still holds true, as basically everyone of note and high net worth has a security contingent even if they are not in public office.
Don't like me shooting where it's legal to do so (ignoring that said Jane D. Citizen moved there well after the range was made) then let me throw a can on my rifle without overbearing requirements on par with owning a gordamn beltfed party pewer.
Don't like people shooting up places? Attack the people doing the shooting. My rifle has, and will not, commit crime. Neither have thousands of other people with similar rifles. The statistics show, and including ALL rifles, that the amount of crime committed (either assault or homicide) with rifles is barely a drop in the bucket versus pretty much any other method. Handguns dwarf them, yet people seem to want to allow the weapon that actually requires the most training, is the least accurate, and is most used in crime.... versus the evil black wargun and it's friends that our nation sends off as the best/most economical tool of force application when diplomacy fails.
I want mine because I know diplomacy fails. Some people are just that stupid, that they think they are not beholden to the social constructs we have collectively built over the years. They've been out there since day 1 of this nation and they aren't going away.
Some of them, like a good portion of the high profile incident perpetrators recently, had people going "something is wrong with this guy". I know that Boy Scouts doesn't teach Sephamore much and/or at all anymore, but exactly what do we need to do to build the tower so the waving red flags can be seen by those that can do something about it?
I mean, my mom worked 12-14 hour shifts and my dad was a mean fucking drunk. I was bullied all the way up until my junior year in HS (at which point my size plus fuck-it switch had become flipped and I went offensive with fists like a fucking badger as soon as someone squared up and cocked back). I was flat out assaulted repeatedly as well up until that same timeframe. I had free, easy access to firearms then, as I do now. How come I didn't shoot up the school?
Zero tolerance environments don't equate zero defects. Back then, administrations made investigations with teachers and other students as witnesses to the event and would act accordingly... even in California where I grew up. Back then, they still did some level of instilling personal responsibility for your own safety. Get out of the area, get somewhere public, get some attention to try to get intervention... and if that didn't work, get down to business because it's your ass on the line till someone steps in.
The same applies with being an adult. I have been in non-military situations where even with all of my best efforts with regards to personal safety, having a weapon on my person and competently leveraging it when my civilian ROE (written out in law as per use of force, justifiable defense for use of force, etc) was exceeded and I was cleared hot to draw down and drop the douches. Thankfully, drawing down was all that was necessary. @medicchick also had a couple instances when I was working shift work and her carrying most likely kept her alive/intact/unsullied, as in one case the guy she drew down on who then retreated, was picked up by Alaska Troopers as a parole violating rapist. This was in the middle of town, just having gotten done with grocery shopping. Thankfully she had been heeding some of the thought matrixes and methods I had instilled into her, and my wedding present to her was the big fucking barrel that got aimed at his brain housing group, causing him to rethink his life choices (or choice to retain life, really) at that instant.
That's the other thing. There's also no good tracking on UOF from victims that doesn't result in a shot fired. I know my instances aren't outliers, as friends I have talked to have had similar instances where carrying saved their ass but they came home with all the ammo they left with. Concealed Nation on Facebook has pretty much daily "one time on the news and then fades" self defense uses, as do other groups. These are all referenced published by verified news sources and police releases, yet they get no attention nor weight in the discussion, it seems.
Disdain for the .223/5.56 also doesn't take into account that it's been shown to actually be safer for the public at large when it comes to home defense, as it doesn't have the common building construction penetration and lethality once through 2 exterior walls, as a shotgun, carbine in pistol caliber, or pistol.
Ignorance of the realities while cranking the television amplifier to 11 with a solid power chord strummed on the heartstrings does not, should not, and if I have any say, will not have any effect on my individual enumerated rights and privileges as a citizen in good standing.
If someone's showing red flags, they need to get checked out. There's a 72hr psych hold to confirm/deny hazard to self or others. Following that, due diligence and proper paperwork on the DA's part can have someone's ability to keep/bear restricted. It's already in the books. Someone who shouldn't have a gun due to prior legal precedent shouldn't be able to purchase a gun, and shouldn't have any from prior to conviction. This is already in the books.
Sad to say, both of these cases, as well as straw purchases and lying on the 4473 are rarely prosecuted by the powers we put in place to enforce these laws and uphold the at-large public safety. Why is that?
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,304
Can I copy and paste these last 2 or 3 posts into my notepad file for future use?
admitting to having drunk illegally?
I admit nothing.
DocIllinois
Verified Military
AR57 uppers or 9mm are no longer a thing? I honestly didn't know, I appreciate that.
I do recognize the continued efforts here, brother. I should hope we both realize, though, that this will be a back and forth about why civilians require beyond a certain level of lethality in any of their their guns for the purposes for which they're used, with a response(s) about how that doesn't matter because the citizenry is allowed to own whatever we choose within the current law but anyway here are the practical reasons, ad nauseum.
Being a reader in this thread is the way for me to go at this point, I think.
Putting a 9mm or 5.7 upper on a rifle doesn't modify the rifle to increase it's capacity to injure/kill. It does the inverse.
You can modify any rifle. Wildcat rounds and custom rifles are, and have been a thing since the first rifle was thought up. The whole point of Weatherby was custom. Just so happens that the AR-15 happens to generally take 2 pins pulled and you can change out stuff. It's actually only one screw to pull out the entire action on a 700 mag, and then you can do whatever the hell you want. Want a new caliber? New barrel and bolt.
Have at it.
Did you know you're more likely to get struck down by Thor than you are to be shot by an assault rifle?
Check out UCR statistics for rifles, weight for 1/3 of rifle stats falling under "assault rifle" definitions as per the made up shit Cali uses, then check out NOAA lightning stats.
Last edited:
policemedic
Verified SWAT
Truth doesn’t matter.
