Yes. In some obscure military document, "assault rifle" is defined as a rifle with select fire, and because the ar-15 is a semi-auto it isn't an assault rifle under this definition. Who gives a fuck? That's not the point and we're not in the military. Elon Musk defined an assault rifle for you and it's the same definition used by anyone and everyone calling the ar15 an assault rifle.
1. Semi-auto 2. Supersonic ammo 3. Removable magazine
Not fucking hard.
So, you arguing that the AR15 isn't an assault rifle is stupid and it looks like you're dodging the point. Instead, just address the fucking issue. Simple fact. The AR15 is arguably the most effective means of self defense available on the market. Yes. It kills people. That's what it's supposed to do! Are you saying that I can't have a self defense weapon capable of killing people?
Words matter, fuck face. If you let your enemies define them you don't have a snow ball's chance in hell at ever defeating them. You might think it's pedantic, but the creatures crafting the narrative choose definitions carefully. Letting them do that is how terms like "girl penis" exist.
"Hey. Look at that hot Chick. She's fine as fuck."
Are we talking about having near motionless sex with sun baked hens or am I compromising words?
And, if you responded to that statement by saying, "umm, axshually, that's a female human being, not a chicken, and shes 98.6 degrees which is normal", you'd look dumb as fuck.
You're a fucking moron. You're conflating regular, accepted vernacular and slang with words used for a purpose to confuse/change important, of the moment issues.
They're not the same, nor used for the same outcome. But, of course, you know that.
No dickhead. I'm not. Those trying to argue that an AR is not an assault rifle are using an obscure reference to a decades old military document that doesn't have shit to do with what the left is arguing should be banned. The people who want the AR banned are calling the AR an assault rifle because it is semi auto, has a removable magazine (if I said clip would you shit a brick?), and supersonic rounds. The attempt to argue that what they want banned isn't what they want banned because the term has a definition in some irrelevant military document that is different than the definition they are using is fucking stupid and looks like you're trying to dodge the issue.
Riiight. So maybe I could give you the benefit of the doubt due to your first response (hurr-durr, want to fuck a chicken) and say you were going to the extreme--with a shitty analogy and completely useless reference.
But because there really isn't a definition of "assault rifle"--it's a made up term that's only used in justification of taking ownership of guns away from the people--and that it's generally used in conjunction with the term "military-grade weapons", I'll have to disagree.
Both of those things have only recently sprung into being. Why? Because you know why. To lead the dumbasses who don't know differently into supporting giving up everyone else's guns. My Browning 30.06 is way fucking more powerful and does way more damage than any one of my ARs, and low and behold, it's also a semi auto. Is that an "assault weapon"? Or a "weapon of war"? But it doesn't look scary, it's a hunting rifle. Why would someone ever need it? Oh, it's none of your fucking business.
And if you want to use clip instead of where magazine is appropriate (and vice versa), it doesn't affect me--it shows everyone else how ignorant you are. Go ahead, cowboy.
In 1994, this was used to "define" assault weapons" by DOJ: 'In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use'.
In general. Meaning not specifically. So what the fuck is it? The answer is--whatever we say it is, give up your guns, you bigot. You're nothing but a White Supremacist.
Let's look at your definitions:
Semi-auto. Oh, so nearly every fucking gun that's ever made. Used to be auto only, but once that was removed from the average joe owning them, they needed to move on elsewhere.
Removable mag. Yeah, now we're talking. Wait, no clip?
Supersonic rounds. Wait, that's my 308.
You're leaving out, of course, the other attributed defs that seem to change quite a bit: Pistol grip. Folding stock. Barrel shroud (makes them look scary scary). Bayonet lug (wait, there's not many of them guns around). Grenade launcher (what the fuck, I want one of those).
YOU'RE dodging the issue by ignoring that "assault weapon" changes to whatever (((they))) want to disarm you.
I'm saying (if you would read, you fucking cocksucker), is that there is no definition for assault weapon/rifle. It's yet another way to take guns away.
My OP said to stop using a bullshit definition to argue that an AR is not an assault rifle when arguing with lefties about banning assault rifles. You're making my point.
But because there really isn't a definition of "assault rifle" So what the fuck is it? The answer is--whatever we say it is I'm saying ... is that there is no definition for assault weapon/rifle.
Exactly! So, why in the fuck would anyone insist that an AR isn't an assault rifle, that an assault rifle is a rifle with select fire, or that assault rifles are already banned? The definition being used is from an obscure reference and isn't relevant to what the left is demanding.
They shouldn't try to make this argument. Cause it's fucking stupid and dodges the issue.
And since we are arguing with lefties about "assault rifles" why not peg THEM to a definition and make THEM tell us what they want banned, specifically? Those that know, know. Musk knows, and he spelled it out. Semi auto, removable magazine, supersonic rounds. That's everything from a .223 to a 50 cal., including your 30.06 hunting rifle. Go with it! Go with that definition. Stop demanding that "muh AR isn't an assault rifle." It's a dumb argument and not only avoids the issue and makes your position weak, it misses an opportunity to win the argument.
They are telling you that they basically want every rifle capable of killing someone effectively and efficiently banned. And if you force them into saying that, you win.
For decades they've been saying "muh common sense gun laws" and "no one is trying to take your guns". If they admit that they are trying to take any effective form of personal self defense and any ability to resist tyranny, they can't win. That's not common sense and that's a clear "I'm taking your guns" agenda. When Beto said, "He'll yes I'm taking your AR, your AK, the debate crowd went wild with cheer, but his popularity took a shit and he couldn't even make the next debate. And now, he has zero chance of being governor of Texas even if this state was dark blue because lots of lefties liked their guns.
It's a small fringe of lefties that think gun bans are a gun idea. That's why they use scary terms like "assault rifles" and why they use terms like "common sense gun laws". It's why they avoid calling for a gun registry to enforce a universal background check, and why gun confiscation has to be labeled as a gun buyback and be voluntary. They know that the gun control they need to render us helpless is unpopular. So drive that shit home.
"AREB YOU SAYING I CAN'T HAVE THE MOST EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT MEANS TO PROTECT MYSELF AND MY FAMILY?"
versus
"It's not an assault rifle, idiot, assault rifles are already banned."
Yes. Words matter, but if you intentionally ignore the point of the argument and dismiss that argument with idiotic semantics, you look like you don't have a legit answer.
They want to ban "assault rifles" and using the term in a specific manner. You playing dumb and replying with "they aren't assault rifles" makes you look dumb.
I live near some persons of an organized persuasion who happen to be Mexican. Two days after the Las Vegas Massacre, some of them were loitering, discussing something, and let loose with an AR-15 apparently fitted with a bump stock. From the sound, it was most likely one of the weapons used by the shooters on the ground in Las Vegas. Literally. Trafficking weapons is a Mexican mafia specialty.
The AR-15 is easily capable of full automatic. But it should not be banned. These pussy-ass weirdos whining and kvetching and undertaking multiple TT False Flags are beginning to piss me off.
M’kay.
(Note: Accidentally hit upgrade on my Firefox app, yet will not update my iPhone, so ended up fukkin up my Firefox and had to reinstall, losing all my passwords, and have no current access to whichever of my multiple personalities or combination thereof established the RadMoth thingamajig hereabouts, so had to create another thingamajig, which is moi. On VoaT was Ouroboros69 & OuroborosKitty & Ithakuah & Tourette_Voerman & Rosemarrow, methinks. So, that’s that.)
Let me be more pedantic and contend that the AR-15 is not intended to kill people. US military combat doctrine has found that wounding the enemy is more effective at debilitating opposing forces rather than killing them outright. The AR-15 is considerably less lethal than the M14 it replaced. In fact, the AR's lethality was deemed insufficient for deer hunting in a number of states.
Yes. The US designed the 5.56, not the AR15, to be less deadly in combat than the 7.62 and 30.06. And YES, the 5.56/.223 is not a good hunting round in some states. Some states have even made it illegal to hunt deer or big game with the 5.56 or .223.
That's still a dodge.
1. You are associating 5.56/.223 with the AR15, which is nonsense. The Ruger mini 14 (M14) is also military issue and chambered in 5.56, and several other rifles have a 5.56/.223 chamber. The point that you're making about the round, not the rifle, being less lethal is about range. Big game and deer hunting in some states is about hitting targets several hundreds of yards away. In these states, it is inhumane to hunt with such a wussy round. But here in Texas, deer are shot, usually, under 200 yards and the .223/5.56 round does just fine. Hell, in MS, we hunted deer with a shotgun, hence "double aught buck" and "buckshot" because you shot the deer at under 50 yards.
But for personal self defense, versus combat field assault and defense, the 5.56/.223 and therfore the AR15 is that chamber is the most effective killing rifle you can buy (plus or minus your personal preferences). Don't dodge that point. Drive it home. Yes. It kills people. That's what it's supposed to do! Are you saying I can't have an effective killing weapon to defend my life and the lives of my family?
Wrong. 5.56 is associated with the AR-15 because the AR/M16 is the very reason why the cartridge became popular at all. The Mini 14 was produced after the M16 had been adopted. Ruger was smart enough to sell an M14 clone chambered for the popular new cartridge. The Mini 14 was never issued by the military. It's not even as well made as the M14 and has a different gas system. It was made to be cheap and sold to civilians.
Then, went on to tell the story about how the military adopted the 5.56 because it's less deadly in a combat situation than the prior caliber choices of the 7.62 and the 30.06. You, not me, associated the AR15 with 5.56.
I then simply pointed out that the military used other rifle of that same lower caliber, not just the AR style.
The AR, in 5.56, is intended to kill people quickly, effectively, and efficiently in a personal self defense situation even if it's less deadly at range in combat than larger, more powerful, rounds.
Holy shit. You have a complete absence of reading comprehension. It was pretty obvious when you repeated half of my initial comment with your first response as if you were making some kind of point by paraphrasing what was already written. What a retard.
Again, the Mini 14 was never used by any military.
Again, the Mini 14 was never used by any military.
I didn't intend to suggest it was. I simply worded my sentiment poorly. But that wasn't remotely germane to the issue or the point you made about the AR not being designed to kill. The AR was designed to fire the 5.56 at 1 MOA (or was it 2?). The 5.56 was designed to be less deadly than the 7.62 (3.08 round) and the 3.006. The AR kills just fine within its range.
Way to avoid the point with your selective responses, kike. The AR/M16 and 5.56 were not developed with lethality in mind. It was a downgrade intended to wound without killing. Especially since the military doesn't use hollowpoints. The M855 round makes a nice clean little hole.
Yes. That's true. But the people calling for an assault weapons ban aren't writing law and it is clear what they mean. They want to ban semi automatic rifles that have removable zines and chamber a supersonic round. Trying to use an obscure reference to a military manual to define the term being used by those calling for the ban is nothing more than a dodge.
What are you talking about? Plenty of "Lawmakers" are using the term. And they are trying to redefine Semi automatics as "assault weapons" so that they have a new category that they can ban.
Yes. They've done it before. And that definition of assault rifle was far more retarded that Musk's definition and had nothing to do with select fire. Again, the definition that people are using to insist that AR's are not assault rifles is the obscure retard definition and in no way reflects what the lefties are demanding, so using that obscure retard definition is nothing but avoiding an issue that doesn't need to be avoided.
The term "assault rifle" is there buzz term to push the scary, but the retort, "an AR is not an assault rifle" is simply stupid. Especially, considering that the are referring exactly to the AR 99 times out of a 100.
No. I understand why they are arguing it matters, but the argument is stupid and it makes the person making the argument look pathetic and weak.
Do you think if you keep demanding that "AR's are not assault rifle" then you'll stop them from banning AR's first chance they get? Do you think you're changing minds with that argument?
What? The AR that I think should be banned isn't an assault rifle? Ohh, I didn't know. I guess we don't need to ban them, then.
Is this how you think it's gonna go even once? Do you think they will just stop using their scary buzz term because that scary buzz term has a definition in some decades old military document?
Why not just argue the points that matter and get over your policing of speech as part of a petty own attempt?
What you just said proves to me that you don't understand. It's not about AR's, it is about everything else that fits that definition being banned along with the AR. This is their gateway to ban all kinds of firearms.
it is about everything else that fits that definition being banned along with the AR.
Nigger, it seems like you can't read. Of course its about all the other.
1. Semiautomatics with 2. Removable magazines and 3. Supersonic rounds
They want to ban "assault rifles" using this definition which is literally hundreds of different kinds of guns.
But you're here fighting that agenda b with a dumbassed assertion that, "the AR is not an assault rifle" or "assault rifles are already banned". IT ISN'T HELPING and its fucking dumb.
That’s exactly right. None of them are full auto. They aren’t. There’s nothing you can do to change that. Yep, all semi auto and that’s it. Nothing to see here.
There is more to it then that. If you want to properly convert an AR into an automatic type of fire arm. you have to drill an extra hole in the lower, add an auto sear and you have to either use an M16 BCG or customize a standard BCG.
I missed the extra hole required. I didn't know that, but you can buy aftermarket bolts in the auto configuration. Still not hard and the suggestion that you can't do it, is inappropriate.
What do you mean the G3 isn't a battle rifle? Why not? Because it wasn't used extensively in any conflict? How is the M14 not an MBR? Both the M14 and G3 are chambered in 7.62 as well.
[ + ] PeckerwoodPerry
[ - ] PeckerwoodPerry 11 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 11:14:08 ago (+12/-1)
[ + ] recon_johnny
[ - ] recon_johnny 3 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 13:17:04 ago (+3/-0)
WHICH, is the way they want it.
Faggots like this want you pandering to the tolitarians.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] -2 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 15:00:58 ago (+0/-2)
"Hey. Look at that hot Chick. She's fine as fuck."
Are we talking about having near motionless sex with sun baked hens or am I compromising words?
And, if you responded to that statement by saying, "umm, axshually, that's a female human being, not a chicken, and shes 98.6 degrees which is normal", you'd look dumb as fuck.
[ + ] recon_johnny
[ - ] recon_johnny -1 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 23:38:37 ago (+0/-1)
They're not the same, nor used for the same outcome. But, of course, you know that.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] -1 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 09:02:12 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] recon_johnny
[ - ] recon_johnny 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 12:43:32 ago (+0/-0)
But because there really isn't a definition of "assault rifle"--it's a made up term that's only used in justification of taking ownership of guns away from the people--and that it's generally used in conjunction with the term "military-grade weapons", I'll have to disagree.
Both of those things have only recently sprung into being. Why? Because you know why. To lead the dumbasses who don't know differently into supporting giving up everyone else's guns. My Browning 30.06 is way fucking more powerful and does way more damage than any one of my ARs, and low and behold, it's also a semi auto. Is that an "assault weapon"? Or a "weapon of war"? But it doesn't look scary, it's a hunting rifle. Why would someone ever need it? Oh, it's none of your fucking business.
And if you want to use clip instead of where magazine is appropriate (and vice versa), it doesn't affect me--it shows everyone else how ignorant you are. Go ahead, cowboy.
In 1994, this was used to "define" assault weapons" by DOJ: 'In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use'.
In general. Meaning not specifically. So what the fuck is it? The answer is--whatever we say it is, give up your guns, you bigot. You're nothing but a White Supremacist.
Let's look at your definitions:
Semi-auto. Oh, so nearly every fucking gun that's ever made. Used to be auto only, but once that was removed from the average joe owning them, they needed to move on elsewhere.
Removable mag. Yeah, now we're talking. Wait, no clip?
Supersonic rounds. Wait, that's my 308.
You're leaving out, of course, the other attributed defs that seem to change quite a bit: Pistol grip. Folding stock. Barrel shroud (makes them look scary scary). Bayonet lug (wait, there's not many of them guns around). Grenade launcher (what the fuck, I want one of those).
YOU'RE dodging the issue by ignoring that "assault weapon" changes to whatever (((they))) want to disarm you.
I'm saying (if you would read, you fucking cocksucker), is that there is no definition for assault weapon/rifle. It's yet another way to take guns away.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 14:42:51 ago (+0/-0)
My OP said to stop using a bullshit definition to argue that an AR is not an assault rifle when arguing with lefties about banning assault rifles. You're making my point.
So what the fuck is it? The answer is--whatever we say it is
I'm saying ... is that there is no definition for assault weapon/rifle.
Exactly! So, why in the fuck would anyone insist that an AR isn't an assault rifle, that an assault rifle is a rifle with select fire, or that assault rifles are already banned? The definition being used is from an obscure reference and isn't relevant to what the left is demanding.
They shouldn't try to make this argument. Cause it's fucking stupid and dodges the issue.
And since we are arguing with lefties about "assault rifles" why not peg THEM to a definition and make THEM tell us what they want banned, specifically? Those that know, know. Musk knows, and he spelled it out. Semi auto, removable magazine, supersonic rounds. That's everything from a .223 to a 50 cal., including your 30.06 hunting rifle. Go with it! Go with that definition. Stop demanding that "muh AR isn't an assault rifle." It's a dumb argument and not only avoids the issue and makes your position weak, it misses an opportunity to win the argument.
They are telling you that they basically want every rifle capable of killing someone effectively and efficiently banned. And if you force them into saying that, you win.
For decades they've been saying "muh common sense gun laws" and "no one is trying to take your guns". If they admit that they are trying to take any effective form of personal self defense and any ability to resist tyranny, they can't win. That's not common sense and that's a clear "I'm taking your guns" agenda. When Beto said, "He'll yes I'm taking your AR, your AK, the debate crowd went wild with cheer, but his popularity took a shit and he couldn't even make the next debate. And now, he has zero chance of being governor of Texas even if this state was dark blue because lots of lefties liked their guns.
It's a small fringe of lefties that think gun bans are a gun idea. That's why they use scary terms like "assault rifles" and why they use terms like "common sense gun laws". It's why they avoid calling for a gun registry to enforce a universal background check, and why gun confiscation has to be labeled as a gun buyback and be voluntary. They know that the gun control they need to render us helpless is unpopular. So drive that shit home.
"AREB YOU SAYING I CAN'T HAVE THE MOST EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT MEANS TO PROTECT MYSELF AND MY FAMILY?"
versus
"It's not an assault rifle, idiot, assault rifles are already banned."
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] -1 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 14:49:56 ago (+0/-1)
They want to ban "assault rifles" and using the term in a specific manner. You playing dumb and replying with "they aren't assault rifles" makes you look dumb.
[ + ] JudyStroyer
[ - ] JudyStroyer 3 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 10:42:30 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] PrincessRobotBubblegum
[ - ] PrincessRobotBubblegum 1 point 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 15:23:14 ago (+1/-0)
The AR-15 is easily capable of full automatic. But it should not be banned. These pussy-ass weirdos whining and kvetching and undertaking multiple TT False Flags are beginning to piss me off.
M’kay.
(Note: Accidentally hit upgrade on my Firefox app, yet will not update my iPhone, so ended up fukkin up my Firefox and had to reinstall, losing all my passwords, and have no current access to whichever of my multiple personalities or combination thereof established the RadMoth thingamajig hereabouts, so had to create another thingamajig, which is moi.
On VoaT was Ouroboros69 & OuroborosKitty & Ithakuah & Tourette_Voerman & Rosemarrow, methinks. So, that’s that.)
::: ::: :::
Edit:
UwU
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 15:41:07 ago (+0/-0)
These FF's make me want to buy more guns. And when cops are made out to be cowards, it just amplifies the need for more guns.
[ + ] Spaceman84
[ - ] Spaceman84 1 point 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 11:00:28 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 11:19:09 ago (+0/-0)
Yes. The US designed the 5.56, not the AR15, to be less deadly in combat than the 7.62 and 30.06. And YES, the 5.56/.223 is not a good hunting round in some states. Some states have even made it illegal to hunt deer or big game with the 5.56 or .223.
That's still a dodge.
1. You are associating 5.56/.223 with the AR15, which is nonsense. The Ruger mini 14 (M14) is also military issue and chambered in 5.56, and several other rifles have a 5.56/.223 chamber. The point that you're making about the round, not the rifle, being less lethal is about range. Big game and deer hunting in some states is about hitting targets several hundreds of yards away. In these states, it is inhumane to hunt with such a wussy round. But here in Texas, deer are shot, usually, under 200 yards and the .223/5.56 round does just fine. Hell, in MS, we hunted deer with a shotgun, hence "double aught buck" and "buckshot" because you shot the deer at under 50 yards.
But for personal self defense, versus combat field assault and defense, the 5.56/.223 and therfore the AR15 is that chamber is the most effective killing rifle you can buy (plus or minus your personal preferences). Don't dodge that point. Drive it home. Yes. It kills people. That's what it's supposed to do! Are you saying I can't have an effective killing weapon to defend my life and the lives of my family?
[ + ] Spaceman84
[ - ] Spaceman84 2 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 13:30:49 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 14:56:46 ago (+0/-0)*
You said
Then, went on to tell the story about how the military adopted the 5.56 because it's less deadly in a combat situation than the prior caliber choices of the 7.62 and the 30.06. You, not me, associated the AR15 with 5.56.
I then simply pointed out that the military used other rifle of that same lower caliber, not just the AR style.
The AR, in 5.56, is intended to kill people quickly, effectively, and efficiently in a personal self defense situation even if it's less deadly at range in combat than larger, more powerful, rounds.
[ + ] Spaceman84
[ - ] Spaceman84 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 15:51:29 ago (+0/-0)
Again, the Mini 14 was never used by any military.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 15:58:40 ago (+0/-0)
I didn't intend to suggest it was. I simply worded my sentiment poorly. But that wasn't remotely germane to the issue or the point you made about the AR not being designed to kill. The AR was designed to fire the 5.56 at 1 MOA (or was it 2?). The 5.56 was designed to be less deadly than the 7.62 (3.08 round) and the 3.006. The AR kills just fine within its range.
[ + ] Spaceman84
[ - ] Spaceman84 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 16:03:22 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Spaceman84
[ - ] Spaceman84 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 15:53:36 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Thyhorrorcosmic103
[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 18:16:45 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 18:20:52 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Thyhorrorcosmic103
[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 06:34:41 ago (+0/-0)*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
They have done it before.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 08:53:34 ago (+0/-0)
Yes. They've done it before. And that definition of assault rifle was far more retarded that Musk's definition and had nothing to do with select fire. Again, the definition that people are using to insist that AR's are not assault rifles is the obscure retard definition and in no way reflects what the lefties are demanding, so using that obscure retard definition is nothing but avoiding an issue that doesn't need to be avoided.
The term "assault rifle" is there buzz term to push the scary, but the retort, "an AR is not an assault rifle" is simply stupid. Especially, considering that the are referring exactly to the AR 99 times out of a 100.
[ + ] Thyhorrorcosmic103
[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 08:58:10 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 09:14:30 ago (+0/-0)
Do you think if you keep demanding that "AR's are not assault rifle" then you'll stop them from banning AR's first chance they get? Do you think you're changing minds with that argument?
Is this how you think it's gonna go even once? Do you think they will just stop using their scary buzz term because that scary buzz term has a definition in some decades old military document?
Why not just argue the points that matter and get over your policing of speech as part of a petty own attempt?
[ + ] Thyhorrorcosmic103
[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 09:22:56 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 09:43:15 ago (+0/-0)
Nigger, it seems like you can't read. Of course its about all the other.
1. Semiautomatics with
2. Removable magazines and
3. Supersonic rounds
They want to ban "assault rifles" using this definition which is literally hundreds of different kinds of guns.
But you're here fighting that agenda b with a dumbassed assertion that, "the AR is not an assault rifle" or "assault rifles are already banned". IT ISN'T HELPING and its fucking dumb.
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug -3 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 11:12:31 ago (+0/-3)
[ + ] ilikeskittles
[ - ] ilikeskittles 4 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 11:57:30 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] MasklessTheGreat
[ - ] MasklessTheGreat 3 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 12:05:29 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 15:07:34 ago (+0/-0)
1. Remove semi-auti fire box and selector.
2. Install new fire box and selector.
Conversions are easy.
[ + ] Thyhorrorcosmic103
[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 06:33:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 08:56:07 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Thyhorrorcosmic103
[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 09:00:31 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 12:23:47 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 15:05:57 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Spaceman84
[ - ] Spaceman84 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 11:10:23 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 15:17:51 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 28, 2022 15:55:21 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 11:03:12 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Spaceman84
[ - ] Spaceman84 1 point 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 11:09:44 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Thyhorrorcosmic103
[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 -1 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 06:40:15 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 11:05:46 ago (+0/-0)
Amerika ist wunderbar♪
[ + ] Thyhorrorcosmic103
[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 12:08:24 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 12:58:21 ago (+0/-0)
It beats the Petersons.
The irony is also apparently lost on you when you think the world is American-centric.
[ + ] Thyhorrorcosmic103
[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 0 points 1.9 yearsMay 29, 2022 13:01:42 ago (+0/-0)