"Virginia Democrats won an election. Gun owners are talking civil war"

Thus meaning private civilian individuals do have a legitimate need for not only such firearms, but also such magazines, as such a scenario can easily be faced by anyone in society at any given time.

 

The AR15 that is M16 prototype is not the AR15 sold on the civilian market since 1963.
You choose to be wrong.

 

There is no requirement for anyone to defend defending the Constitution. Just because a narrow majority of gun grabbers located within 30 miles of DC wants to enforce a violation of the 2nd does not mean the rest of the people have to embrace the idea.

 

I have no doubt the citizens will win in any court that respects the law BUT, the state will Judge shop so nothing is clear/

 

Thank you for saving me from replying.

 

They might want to. And what if they did? What if they wrote some sort of Declaration of Independence?

 

Notice how they want total gun freedom but have not petitioned to have basically total freedom from the state. Mostly because they know they need the states money to survive.

Wonder if they would accept, the gun laws and not affecting them in return from them being free from the state government and becoming a "county, city"

 

Anyone who is against background checks, should be assumed to have a dirty past.
Anyone who is against mental health checks should be assumed to be mentally ill
Anyone who is against restricting weapons capable of killing hundreds should be assumed to be planning a mass shooting.

In Canada gun culture is, I want to make sure threats don't get guns, not, everyone should get a gun and only lose it after harming or killing someone.

 

The 2nd Amendment can ONLY be changed by a new Amendment, just like Prohibition could only be changed with a new Amendment. The Virginia rogues are exactly that, "rogues."

 

Okay, I'm going to make one more try here, because I'm obviously not making myself understood.

This time I'll restrict my question only to those who actually own an AR-15:

What do you use it for?

If you don't own one, please refraing from replying. Thank you.

 

I'm sorry, could you please be a little more vague? </sarcasm>

 

And you choose to be both ignorant and insulting, so back at ya. Try reading the links that I provided on this thread. Al know quite well that the AR-15 that is available to civilians is not the same as the M16 that the military uses. They are based on the same original design.

And why do you call it a prototype?

 

Then background checks should be performed before any individual is allowed to vote in an election.

Then mental health checks should be performed before any individual is allowed to either run for or otherwise hold public office.

Pray tell, exactly which firearms on the private market have been proven capable of killing hundreds? Demonstrate such. Show what is being referred to.

Then move to the nation of Canada, rather than complaining about the culture of the united states not being according to the liking of yourself.

 

Those who own AR-15s in a legal manner, use them for any and all legal purposes.

Just as those who do not own firearms, do not use firearms, and do not have basic knowledge of firearms, should not bother to even comment on what firearm-related restrictions are needed in the united states.

Are any firearms owned on the part of yourself? If not then do not bother commenting further on the discussion.

 

Any threat the law enforcement faces, is a threat that private citizens also face in their day-to-day lives. If law enforcement officers need such magazines and such firearms when responding to the report of a crime, private citizens need such firearms when they are the intended victim of said crime.

 

The obvious question of "so what?" must be asked with regard to the above. What ultimate, meaningful difference doe such actually make? Explain such. Prove such actually has a relevancy worth mentioning.

Because that is ultimately what the Armalite AR-15 was. Nothing more than a prototype design.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armalite_AR-15

The ArmaLite AR-15 is a selective fire, air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed rifle manufactured in the United States between 1959 and 1964. Its military version was adopted by the United States Armed Forces as the M16 rifle. The military version M-16 was a select fire, air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed rifle. [5] Designed by American gun manufacturer ArmaLite in 1956(A division Fairchild Aircraft Company), it was based on its AR-10 rifle. The ArmaLite AR-15 was designed to be a selective fire, lightweight rifle and to fire a new high-velocity, lightweight, small-caliber cartridge to allow the carry of more ammunition.

In 1959, ArmaLite sold its rights to the AR-15 to Colt due to financial difficulties, and limitations in terms of manpower and production capacity.[6] After modifications (most notably, the charging handle was re-located from under the carrying handle like AR-10 to the rear of the receiver),[7] Colt rebranded it the Colt 601, however it still carried the Armalite markings due to contractual obligations to Armalite/Fairchild Aircraft Co. Colt marketed the redesigned rifle to various military services around the world and it was subsequently adopted by the U.S. military as the M16 rifle, which went into production in March 1964.[5][8]

Colt continued to use the AR-15 trademark for its line of semi-automatic-only rifles marketed to civilian and law-enforcement customers, known as Colt AR-15. The Armalite AR-15 is the parent of a variety of Colt AR-15 & M16 rifle variants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_AR-15

The Colt AR-15 is a lightweight, 5.56×45mm, magazine-fed, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle. The "AR” stands for Armalite Rifle. It was designed to be manufactured with extensive use of aluminum alloys and synthetic materials. Colt was but no longer is marketing to civilian customers and is presently only marketing to law-enforcement customers, due to oversaturation in the civilian market.[1] Colt's Manufacturing Company currently uses the AR-15 trademark for its line of semi-automatic AR-15 rifles.

 

Everyone should be allowed to vote in a democracy.

I agree, everyone should be required to be declared healthy and stable before running for office.

Those used in the Las Vegas shooting

That takes 6 years.

 

Unsupportable nonsense.

 

All of the traditionally legal uses for a firearm - except fowl hunting.

 

And thus,m you recognize the AR15 and M16 were not designed for the same purpose.
Thank you

 

The united states is not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic.

If such firearms are truly capable of killing hundreds, why did Stephen Paddock only manage a mere fifty eight? He was using multiple firearms, discharging hundreds if not thousands of rounds of ammunition, into a tightly packed crowd where he did not even have to aim to hit anyone, and from a vantage point that made retaliation physically impossible. Yet, despite supposedly being able to kill hundreds, he managed only fifty eight.

Explain why such is the case. How were the firearms used proven as capable of killing hundreds, when such simply did not happen?

As opposed to spending decades advocating for something that may ultimately never come to pass?

 

For shooting.

 

Sure, I’ll answer your question. But first, would you share what you use your handgun for? I believe you said you had a magnum research baby eagle?

 

Good question. We've already fought one Civil War, which cost the lives of more Americans than all our other wars combined. I, for one, don't feel a need to fight another. Rather, let any state that wants to go it alone do so. They might find it a much larger challenge competing with other countries of the world on their own than when they were part of the U.S. I suspect that will be the case.

 

Nearly 1000 people were shot and or injured in the LV shooting, meaning 1000 could have died. the definition of casualty is death or severe injury.

So it is disingenuous to claim that because only 58 died that it was not capable of killing hundreds. It is a weapon of war.