Something you won't find in your mainstream media

[RUSH1]

That's the point; same deadly weapon to fight whatever. What use is a non-deadly weapon to a militia.

The new military rifle uses ammo with a steel head on the round, because of the 80,000 psi chamber pressure meant to overcome the enemies plate armor. So, now the AR is not as useful.

I recommend the M1A with tungsten core ammo . . . you know, if you need to fight invaders with plate armor. West Coasters should heed that news.

Good luck getting anywhere with that guy. 

[guncrasher]

That's the point; same deadly weapon to fight whatever. What use is a non-deadly weapon to a militia.

The new military rifle uses ammo with a steel head on the round, because of the 80,000 psi chamber pressure meant to overcome the enemies plate armor. So, now the AR is not as useful.

I recommend the M1A with tungsten core ammo . . . you know, if you need to fight invaders with plate armor. West Coasters should heed that news.

but what I am talking about is ar15 being argued not an assault weapon.  colt says it is, tested in combat.  that was their commercial.  look close, ar15 there, tested in combat but not an assault weapon.


semp

[nrshida]

Just an update ON-TOPIC for you lot.

Thought your topic was essentially: Look Americans, banning guns does't work.

This is the same prime minister that rushed through poorly written laws in reaction to the christchurch mass shooting, and kicked off a gun buyback scheme that has been an abysmal failure.

Partial failure in implimentation is the only conclusion which can be infered from your narrative. Stolen, abandoned documents etc was likely not part of the plan - to specify one issue.

That is mental illness .. a sad sick cry for attention

More commonly suicide attempts are used for that.

This was actually discussed BEFORE the Constitution was designated the law of the land (as well as Jefferson's preference to an end to slavery). Sam Adams had a lot to say about it, and his writings are easy to find, as are Franklin's. The "militia" was supposed to be well practiced in the use of current military firearms, so that they could be called up at a moment's notice for the common defense. The AR-15 is ideally suited for this, because it is so easy to use, maintain, and affordable to everyone. On the downside it is easy to abuse, as well.

That's a good and pertinent point. In that time a militia was necessary because your formal military was small (is that right? I think so in the war of independence). Presently the US military is the largest, out-sizing its closest competitor by a factor of something like 2.5 (I should imagine). I think it is something like that because ironically it was the metric the British Empire arrived at to retain its Empire also. So why has this part of your constitution not been amended as your country and culture developed past the original need? Uniquely you have hundreds of years of firearm ownership as an inherent part of your culture, your tradition and history. It would be niave, impractical and arguably a shame to try to end that (well, as we can see from an almost reverential attitude towards them). However societal responsibility has not evolved in accordance or even maintained its position in a dynamic case. That would need consistent ethical conditioning with a regard to consideration for others and society as an entity (as FLS pointed out that's hard to do without good and present parenting, or wherein basic day-to-day survival is not the focus), a really good mental health system. Observational (passive or active) monitoring likely with teachers raising flags for observation or consultation. First you would all have to mostly agree that this is a priority. Progress is clearly blocked far too often by splitting into uncooperative factions. Start talking to each other.

Those things would have to be better than other cultures. Presently you rank very below average in those areas. Keep your guns. But raise the quality of your society - is the obvious implication.

^ Bit speedily written but I'm busy today.

[Chalenge]

but what I am talking about is ar15 being argued not an assault weapon.  colt says it is, tested in combat.  that was their commercial.  look close, ar15 there, tested in combat but not an assault weapon.

Good luck trying to assault positions protected by automatic weapons with an AR-15. The essence of the AR-15 has been combat tested, but semi-auto weapons are a poor substitute for something with auto-fire modes, like an M4.

The new Sig takes this all to a new level. Pray none of those hit the streets. You can buy the semi version, but not the hotter ammo. You would have to have the military barrel to handle the military ammo anyway.

The law coming through Congress now demonstrates their disconnect, because you will no longer be legally allowed to assemble rifles. Good luck legally cleaning your rifle. Also, you will not be able to build your own anything.

[zack1234]

Everyone knows who the people are who are not fit to own a gun.

You don’t need a degree to know.

The fact that the Western individual is stateless, god less and narcissistic is the problem.

Anger at your own people highlights you don’t have a people.

Majority of serial killers are white middleclass fatherless mummy’s boys….fact

[LCADolby]

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws". - Plato

[Eagler]

Majority of serial killers are white middleclass fatherless mummy’s boys….fact

The breakdown of the family unit - which was a moto of one of the rioting burning looting groups of 2020 - is one of the main root causes for many messed up things in America if not the globe.

It takes a caring mother and father to raise a child properly..not a self centered idiotic village and uncaring daycare

But we've sacrificed that for more materialism and greed and are suffering the consequences IMO.

Eagler

[FLS]

Not very familiar with guns in general are ya?

A weapon designed for a multiple round firing mode will have a 3 way switch at times. But semiautomatic weapons most often only have a "safety". Nothing more for the firing of multiple rounds on one trigger pull.

You don't understand that I just said that, then you repeated what I said like I don't know it already.

The snark when you are so very wrong just makes it hilarious. You never heard of the Beretta 93R?

[FLS]

...
That's a good and pertinent point. In that time a militia was necessary because your formal military was small...

This is a common mistake, defining militia only as an organization. The usage in the 2A simply refers to men of military age. A militia can be organized but it's basically an age group subset of the male population. The founders didn't even want a professional army if they could avoid it, which it turned out they couldn't.

The 2A concern for personal arms came from the European practice of forbidding them to the common people. Only the elite could bear arms. This is similar to banning guns except for the bodyguards of the rich and powerful.

[decoy]

Well, thanks for that! I read thru the relevant posts where the conversation was about a "safety" and a selective fire switch. That was what I was trying to address.  The difference between the two and that all weapons don't necessarily have both OR either.

Your reading comprehension is a bit lacking isn't it?

I'd bet a very large sum that I know more about firearms laws and regulations than you do. Either way, your snide comment is just that, the snide comment of a handsomehunk.

You're right.  That was a snide remark and for that, I apologize.  However, there is an element of the pot calling the kettle black in this exchange, so we would both be better if neither of us engages it it on purpose.

[guncrasher]

Good luck trying to assault positions protected by automatic weapons with an AR-15. The essence of the AR-15 has been combat tested, but semi-auto weapons are a poor substitute for something with auto-fire modes, like an M4.

The new Sig takes this all to a new level. Pray none of those hit the streets. You can buy the semi version, but not the hotter ammo. You would have to have the military barrel to handle the military ammo anyway.

The law coming through Congress now demonstrates their disconnect, because you will no longer be legally allowed to assemble rifles. Good luck legally cleaning your rifle. Also, you will not be able to build your own anything.

normandy. only m1s


semp

[SIM]

Only M1's? Thats funny.................or stupid.

https://www.historyonthenet.com/d-day-weapons

[guncrasher]

Only M1's? Thats funny.................or stupid.

https://www.historyonthenet.com/d-day-weapons

only m1s instead of ar15s.

semp

edit: and a lot less rounds.

[Chalenge]

only m1s instead of ar15s.

semp

edit: and a lot less rounds.

Bangalores, Thompsons, BARs, and Flame throwers. I own a Thompson and a BAR, but they want my AR15? Pfft. Next thing you know they'll come for the M2, or the 88! Meh.

[Vulcan]

Thought your topic was essentially: Look Americans, banning guns does't work.

No it was more "our PM is being hailed for her gun laws despite what is truely going on back home".

I don't pretend to know the answer to the issues you have in the USA. It's a complex environment, and a complex problem which will require a long term solution (as in a solution that may take decades to have the desired effect).

My observation, looking from the outside - is that you have two diametrically opposed 'factions' (pro gun and anti gun) unwilling to give an inch for fear the other will take a foot. And to be honest I think both sides have valid concerns. So the question is how do you get both sides to the table to come to a realistic workable solution. If I were honest, I'd say you cannot and you guys are never ever going to resolve this problem.