Biden announces proposed gun control measures

[Newtosavage]

Good job dodging my question. Since i don't reload i don't see your need to have multiple pounds of powder. Really you should just need 1/2 lb at most because nobody needs to shoot more than that. See how this works?

Okay. you're entitled to that opinion. See how that works?

 

[Newtosavage]

The government will never limit its own power or give up powers it already has; it will only grow. Maybe some pro-gun politicians delay the growth slightly, but we all see what is coming eventually, whether it's under this administration or the next.

The only answer? Nullification. Exactly as prescribed by Madison and the founders. Everyone should check out the Tenth Amendment Center for more details and info as I think they're the only ones who are getting this right.

what exactly do you mean by "nullification?"

 

[brocksw]

I get all that, but where the logic falls short (in my view at least) is the idea that we need AR's and high cap magazines to "defend" ourselves. Defend ourselves against what exactly? I mean, map out a scenario for me where only an AR will do. I am just not seeing it.

Also, if it's a "tyrannical government" that I'm defending myself against, no amount of AR's and cases of ammo are going to do me or anyone else a damn bit of good when they send in the aircraft and neutralize my entire house.

How long have we been at war in the middle east?

I don't know their weaponry that well, but I'd assume they're using old AK-47s, a toyota hilux for a "Humvee", IEDs made from old mines and recycled military and household products.....we've been over there for 20 years with jets, tanks, war ships, thermal imaging, snipers, drones.....by your logic that whole war should've been over in a week.

Some good ol fashion want to and fighting for a cause can go a long way. Listen to any historian or international affairs expert.... they all say the same thing. "people think what happened in Germany or Russia, can't happen here. But it can." I think it's important we don't go looking for that fight and we keep a clear eyed view about who and when to fight.

 

[dsotm]

do you feel so threatened by my opinion that now you are offering me advice?

And fwiw, I don't own a compound but I do have a stable full of recurves and longbows and do just fine with them. I also enjoy my muzzleloader quite a bit.

Focus on your own choices and try to worry less about mine.

You saying you don't see the need for what others do focuses on the choices of others. You should heed your own advice.

 

[orionthehunter1]

ha, i'm glad someone else also spotted the hypocrisy

 

[Newtosavage]

You saying you don't see the need for what others do focuses on the choices of others. You should heed your own advice.

that's interesting logic. I said "I" don't see the need. If I had said "they don't need" or "they are wrong to see the need" then you would be correct. Again, I am explaining my own views. Why, I'm not sure because every time I do this the 2A mob smells blood in the water and starts circling like sharks. It's really unbelievable that one person's opinion should be so upsetting. It's just one man's opinion. Calm down.

 

[BjornF16]

I get all that, but where the logic falls short (in my view at least) is the idea that we need AR's and high cap magazines to "defend" ourselves. Defend ourselves against what exactly? I mean, map out a scenario for me where only an AR will do. I am just not seeing it.

If I need to defend my home or the loved ones inside of it, my shotgun does a great job and is safer for the other occupants in the home. A semi-auto high velocity rifle just isn't an ideal home-defense weapon because it puts innocent people at risk.

Also, if it's a "tyrannical government" that I'm defending myself against, no amount of AR's and cases of ammo are going to do me or anyone else a damn bit of good when they send in the aircraft and neutralize my entire house.

So what is that scenario where an AR with a high capacity magazine is the right tool? I just don't see it. To me, an AR is best used for killing people on the battlefield (it's intended purpose) or plinking/target practice. If I need to defend my home, that's not the weapon I'm reaching for, and if I want to hunt, it's not the weapon I'm reaching for. Heck, when I was an LEO I preferred my Mini-14 and carried it as long as they would allow me. When I had to transition to the AR platform, I wasn't very pleased about it since I thought the Mini was a better platform for the intended job.

If that makes me a "fudd" in some people's minds, then so be it. But we all get the same number of votes, so be judicious with your criticism of fellow hunters and shooters.

First of all, an AR-15 is not a battlefield tool. M4 (select fire) and M-16 (select fire, full auto) were used by the US military. AR-15s were not ever used by the military.

Some police forces use AR-15s? Why? Because it is effective.

Secondly, depending on what you are using for shotgun, it can be worse than an AR-15 shooting V-Max, or A-Max rounds. Buckshot will keep on trucking where V-Max doesn't.

Thirdly, the way your house or apartment is setup may be different than mine (or others). I live on 3 acres. I'm not concerned with over penetration. My neighbors are over 100 yards away from my house.

The AR-15 is an excellent self-defense tool. Just ask (or search the web, preferably using DuckDuckGo) for examples of homeowners using AR-15s for self defense.

It is my "go to" for self defense. I also use an AR-15 in 6.5 Grendel for hunting. Harvested many whitetails with it. Larger magazines are great for hog hunting.

 

[PistolPete]

what exactly do you mean by "nullification?"

Check out more info here: https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/nullification-overview/

From there: "...refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union.” The federal government involves itself in almost every aspect of life, but depends on state assistance to do almost everything. If states refuse to help, it becomes nearly impossible for the feds to enforce their laws or implement their programs.

Think marijuana decriminalization. Or the second amendment sanctuary counties. If the local sheriff is on the right side, it really hamstrings federal laws. Even moreso if the entire state is against it.

 

[Newtosavage]

ha, i'm glad someone else also spotted the hypocrisy

Not hardly.

Or do you think if you stated your view and I told you to stop trying to tell others what to do, you'd be a hypocrite? LOL I'm not so sensitive that I feel attacked because someone simply stated their view.

If someone wants to own ICBM's and it's their opinion they should be allowed to, I couldn't care less. They are entitled to that opinion and their one vote. That's how all this works friend.

 

[Bubblehide]

Need has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. Newtosavage, you really need to step back and look at the intent of the 2nd.

 

[dsotm]

that's interesting logic. I said "I" don't see the need. If I had said "they don't need" or "they are wrong to see the need" then you would be correct. Again, I am explaining my own views. Why, I'm not sure because every time I do this the 2A mob smells blood in the water and starts circling like sharks. It's really unbelievable that one person's opinion should be so upsetting. It's just one man's opinion. Calm down.

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.



Opinions like yours are poisonous. Do you think they aren't coming for your fudd guns if they are able to take ARs and others?

 

[BjornF16]

Focus on your own choices and try to worry less about mine.

That is actually great advice!

Those who choose AR-15s for self defense and/or hunting shouldn't have others worrying about their choice.

 

[Newtosavage]

First of all, an AR-15 is not a battlefield tool. M4 (select fire) and M-16 (select fire, full auto) were used by the US military. AR-15s were not ever used by the military.

Some police forces use AR-15s? Why? Because it is effective.

Secondly, depending on what you are using for shotgun, it can be worse than an AR-15 shooting V-Max, or A-Max rounds. Buckshot will keep on trucking where V-Max doesn't.

Thirdly, the way your house or apartment is setup may be different than mine (or others). I live on 3 acres. I'm not concerned with over penetration. My neighbors are over 100 yards away from my house.

The AR-15 is an excellent self-defense tool. Just ask (or search the web, preferably using DuckDuckGo) for examples of homeowners using AR-15s for self defense.

It is my "go to" for self defense. I also use an AR-15 in 6.5 Grendel for hunting. Harvested many whitetails with it. Larger magazines are great for hog hunting.

Here we go again... Everyone circle around and "educate" poor Newt...

Friend, I know the whole history of the AR platform. My son was issued an M4 and I was issued an AR. It's just easier to say AR because everyone knows what you're talking about. Calm down.

I also live on 3 acres. But there are times when I have my children home visiting and slinging high velocity .22 cal bullets through walls wouldn't be my preferred option. But you go right ahead.

Just because homeowners have used AR's for self/home defense doesn't mean they are the most effective or safest for non-targets. It just means that's what they chose to use.

Finally, I'm over 1K on hogs. over 400 with my lever action 30-30 alone. I'm well aware of the value of high capacity magazines and semi-auto rifles for feral animal control. But it's not surprising that a weapon that "evolved" from one designed to kill groups of humans is also effective at killing groups of human-sized animals.

 

[19hunt92]

I feel like this is a large room with a bunch of bickering and many separate conversations....blow the air horn, get everyone's attention

"Shall not be infringed" is not hunting, is not recreation, it means you have the right to own any weapon that is made (extreme point i know) but is what it meant. Match the government power, one guy with an RPG matches one government employee with an RPG. One civilian with an Abrams tank matches one government employee with an Abrams tank.
You run the risk of a civilian being slightly off their rocker and not using these weapons appropriately...but i also don't trust the government …probably trust a civilian more actually.
So yes H.R. 4332 is an infringement as is many others. We have been flirting with this for a while and it needs to come to a halt or we all give it up...time and bullets will tell

 

[Newtosavage]

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.



Opinions like yours are poisonous. Do you think they aren't coming for your fudd guns if they are able to take ARs and others?

Opinions like mine are actually pretty common. Don't let it upset you.

 

[Newtosavage]

That is actually great advice!

Those who choose AR-15s for self defense and/or hunting shouldn't have others worrying about their choice.

I agree, which is why I only ever spoke about my own choices, only to be ganged up on and "educated." LOL

 

[Newtosavage]

So yes H.R. 4332 is an infringement as is many others. We have been flirting with this for a while and it needs to come to a halt or we all give it up...time and bullets will tell

There is a very small minority of people in this country who feel this way. So unless you plan on installing something other than a democracy, I don't think you'll get much support for your idea. Probably about as much support as those idiots who stormed the capitol on the 6th are getting right now.

 

[orionthehunter1]

Not hardly.

Or do you think if you stated your view and I told you to stop trying to tell others what to do, you'd be a hypocrite? LOL I'm not so sensitive that I feel attacked because someone simply stated their view.

If someone wants to own ICBM's and it's their opinion they should be allowed to, I couldn't care less. They are entitled to that opinion and their one vote. That's how all this works friend.

I know how it works I'm not asking people why they need certain things for self defense or scrutinizing their choices

 

[mlgc20]

I was in the Bass Pro by the DFW airport a few years ago. I was looking at ammo (when that was an option). I started chatting with this other guy doing the same thing. He had immigrated to the US several years before from a country in Africa. I don't remember which one. Maybe Mali? Anyway, he starts telling me (very passionately) about how American's don't know how good they have it with the 2nd amendment and how we take it for granted. He goes on to tell me that guns had been banned in his country. He said there were really few people outside of criminals who had guns.

He said the way people would rob you in his country was very different than here in the US. You would get a knock on your door and when you opened it there would be a group of a few guys with a gas can and box of matches. They would ask for whatever they were going to ask you for. And if you didn't comply they would dump gas on your porch and burn your house down. They knew nobody had any guns to fight them with.

I always think of that conversation whenever this topic comes up.

 

[Newtosavage]

I know how it works I'm not asking people why they need certain things for self defense or scrutinizing their choices

And neither am I.

Don't confuse someone stating their opinion with telling others what to do.