Usually said by someone who can’t come up with a response.
As has been shown, AR-15s aren’t the huge threat you imagine them to be. All sorts of objects are occasionally misused to harm people. That does not, in my mind (and thankfully in the minds of a majority of our countrymen) justify banning their possession.
I agree that in most situations open-carry of long guns is unhelpful (politically).
Look, like I said, a person carrying a Ar15 in town is likely a show off jerk. But he is not gonna be a criminal, anymore that the guy wearing striped pajamas carrying a big bag with a $ symbol on it over his shoulder. Even if I lived in a open carry state, I wouldnt do so- (I might just carry a handgun in a holster tho.) But I dont wear a diamond studded Rolex either. Both are show off jerks- both have about the same chance of being a criminal (Drug lords love to wear such watches, so i am told).
Yes, it is a normal everyday act that kills 550,000 Americans a year.
OK, they’re a pretty noticeable threat nonetheless, and when they’re a threat, they’re a big threat.
So let’s do something about it. We can walk and chew gum at the same time.
And some of those misused objects have been banned, or close enough to make no never mind. (Try to make that McVeigh fertilizer bomb now.) Didja know that bombs of that sort didn’t kill nearly as many people as automobiles did in 1995? But we essentially banned them anyway, even though the ingredients all had legit purposes, amirite?
Some things, like cars, we’ve gone way too far towards making them indispensable. Conservatives have actively fought against public transit, the use of which brings down automobile deaths by getting people out of their cars. * Conservatives have also fought against many of the safety mandates that have drastically reduced automobile deaths in absolute numbers during my lifetime*, despite a much bigger population that drives a lot more miles than they did back in the 1950s.
So this ‘other objects can be misused’ is a bogus argument. We liberals want fewer deaths from a whole bunch of different means. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. You conservatives are OK with sacrificing the lives of strangers so you can have a fun hobby. And that is not just immoral, it’s a fucking abomination.
Sure, but I am a small “L” liberal and libertarian. And the point is that owning such guns is a constitutional right. And that in general- gun laws in the USA have done nothing significant to reduce violent crime.
And yes, we did put limitations on explosives- but they aren’t covered by the Bill of Rights.
So, to me the 2nd Ad is as Important as the 1st or the 5th. And that putting people in prisons to make others *feel *safer, even tho they are not- is wrong. As Ben Franklin once said: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Or as I paraphrase- “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a feeling of a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
And dont say “we liberals” since I am one also. Speak for yourself. And one thing “liberals” like to do is protect the rights of others, not throw them in prison for* looking* scary.
**You **are OK with sacrificing the rights of strangers so you can feel a little safer. And that is not just immoral, it’s a fucking abomination.
Walking down the street with an AR shows nothing more than what a scared little piece of shit you are. Go ahead, be a big ‘man’ by carrying it.
If you are needing to take it to a gun shop, or to sell it, well, break it down. Don’t use the excuse to scare people.
Phulleassse. What a tough guy you are.
That is one excuse. He said there were many reasons, and I would like to know if there were actually many reasons, or if that was just a standard response to the question.
^ To late to edit. I’m a liberal too. And I own 10 guns. I have never felt the need to walk down the street with one. When I DO, well, then things have really gone to hell.
Why not, they are armaments.
Who is putting who in prison again?
Good point. You have given up the liberty to kill other people, steal their stuff, and rape their women, in exchange, you have the safety of people are not allowed to kill you, steal your stuff, or rape your women.
You deserve neither?
Who is throwing who in prison again?
Who’s rights are being sacrificed here? This isn’t about owning guns, this isn’t even about carrying guns in general, this is specifically about carrying AR-15’s in public.
Out of curiosity, how long could I hang out outside your house marching back and forth with an AR-15 slung over my shoulder before you call someone to ask me to stop?
You want it to be, and it is, as long as a majority of the Supreme Court says it is. That may stay the same, or it may change.
At any rate, I don’t give a flying fuck about that. Like they say, the Constitution isn’t a suicide pact. If a particular interpretation of the Constitution is immoral and insane, then it’s a good idea to come up with a better interpretation. An interpretation of the Constitution that sacrifices people’s lives to a silly hobby is bullshit.
Because we’ve never done much more than nibble around the edges. We’ve never tried serious gun restrictions in this country.
If pro-gun people keep meaningful gun restrictions from happening, and then say, “well, gun regulation doesn’t do any good,” whose fault is that?
Again, that’s an interpretation. Explosives are arms. You may say, “oh, the Founders really only meant firearms, or sidearms, or whatever,” but you could just as easily say, “the Founders only meant those arms available in 1792.”
And frankly, I don’t care about that anyway. The courts allowed plenty of regulation of guns up until Heller. They allow a good deal less now. They may again in the future. Tying this debate to your preferred interpretation of the Second Amendment is bullshit. First, let’s figure out what should be done, then we’ll square it with the Constitution, within the parameters of its several interpretations between its inception and now.
To me, your words are sophistry for saying, “I’ll sacrifice SOMEBODY ELSE’S right to life, for MY hobby.”
Lesser rights, like the right to a particular kind of firearm, have to yield to greater rights, like the right of people to not be mowed down by weapons of mass slaughter.
Those eleven people this morning were just pathetic snowflakes who got scared by the scary man, and fell over in a faint and died?
No, they were fucking killed by a weapon of mass slaughter.
I guess we don’t have to worry about those dead people griping that you’ve taken their rights away. But that’s what’s happened. Their rights are all gone, forever and ever, amen. There’s no way they will ever exercise their first, or second, or fourth, or fifth, or sixth, or…you get the idea. You have taken away all their rights, including their right to take their next breath.
You’re talking about rights, as if your hypothetical rights trump the lives of your fellow citizens. Yes, that’s an abomination. Sacrifice your own damn lives if you want, but slaughtering others’ lives because a particularly expansive interpretation of your own rights is so important to you that those lives weigh nothing in your balance, yes, that’s a fucking abomination.
You are throwing people in prison for owning or carrying a gun.
Many have made it about owning guns.
Look, let us say you see a guy driving a pickup truck with Confederate flags and a horn the plays Dixie. There’s almost a 100% chance he’s a jerk, and close to that of being a right wing racist zealot. White wing racist zealots commit more acts of terrorism here in the USA that any other group. Would you call the police on him because he is possibly dangerous? No, he has the right to be a jerk.
He is? I am? Please roll tape.
When he shoots me with his Confederate flag, I’m sure I’ll be fatally wounded. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
You betcha, I want to regulate the means of mass slaughter. A Confederate flag isn’t one of them, as repugnant as it might be.
You want to ban AR15s, which means that you want to put guys that own them into prison for no other crime that owning a gun that you think is scary.
Actually being a right wing racist zealot is far more dangerous than owning a gun. Right wing racist zealots commit most of the terrorist acts in the nations. So lets ban right wing racist zealots. :rolleyes:Let us put guy with Confederate flags into prison :rolleyes:- as they are far more dangerous that guys who own guns.
Cite?
Many have said…
And that is related to this conversation how, exactly?
Cite? And even in the very unlikely case that AR-15’s would be banned, people would be subject to the penalties of the legal system that are set forth for refusing to follow the law. You would throw people in prison for no other crime than driving 66 in a 65.
Are you in the right thread?
Look at the contradiction: “We’ve never tried serious gun restrictions in this country.The courts allowed plenty of regulation of guns up until Heller.” Actually we have- DC and Chicago (and San Francisco tried)basically banned handguns and even the owning of guns for self defense. Those laws did nothing to reduce violent crime.
Nope they were killed by a *right wing racist zealot . Not by a gun, by a right wing racist zealot . So let’s ban right wing racist zealots. “Oh but we can’t, they have the right to have their own beliefs , repugnant as they are to me.” *
About 1/3 of Americans own a gun.
Only about 5% or less are right wing racist zealots. So, that guy in the CSA truck is way more dangerous to you than some guy who owns a gun.
Lesser rights, like the right to a particular kind of belief, *have to yield to greater rights, like the right of people to not be mowed down by ***right wing racist zealots. **
Once you ban and imprison people for their political beliefs, then we can start doing they same for them owning a gun.
If you want to ban AR15s, that means people who own AR15s will be criminals, no?
Yes, and several of them are right here in this thread.
Because it is just as ridiculous as calling the police on some jerk openly and legally carrying a AR 15 in public. Being a right wing racist zealot is far more dangerous that being a gun owner.
But you attributed that to me, in a response to me. I don’t really care one way or the other. Personally, I would be happy with a licensing system that allowed well qualified individuals to own whatever guns they want, while reducing the number that end up in the hands of the negligent, the irresponsible or the criminal.
That may mean that there are some people who want to have guns that are not allowed to have guns, and they may become criminals. That may mean that there are people who refuse to follow the laws in regards to licensing their guns, and that would be criminal. Anytime you make any law to stop people from doing an activity that has harmful consequences, you are making criminals out of the people who refuse to follow the law, that’s just how laws work. Same as if I put in a lower speed limit for going by a school. The people who want to drive by the school at 55 MPH will be breaking the law.
As to your point of a crazy right wing zealot, it depends. Is he armed? We are not talking about gun owners here, we are talking about people openly carrying AR-15 and AR-15 style rifles in public. That’s a very small subset of gun owners that you are broad brushing the rest of them with.
I accept that allowing people to own cars, alcohol, guns, and cigarettes will all result in some non-zero number of deaths. I do not support banning any of those things.