HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » "Well regulated"...

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 02:33 AM

 

"Well regulated" my ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by SunsetDreams (a host of the General Discussion forum).

I've never focused on all this 2nd Amendment chatter, well ...
not since I fought for stricter gun control after working for
RFK and seeing him gunned down just before his almost
certain democratic ascendancy to the White House.

And we've seen how far that got. i.e. no where. Well,
no where good anyway.

Now, I'm forced to re-examine the 2nd Amendment in the wake
of the Aurora massacre; and for the first time, those two words
"well regulated" kind of jumped out at me ... like DING! DING!

I mean, come on people. If these words "well regulated" don't
at least suggest some kind of controls, if not spelling out in bold
red letters "MUST HAVE GUN CONTROLS" .. I mean really ... I can't
help but think that the Constitutional framers had SOMETHING in
mind, other than what we have now ... which is an ongoing string
of random mass murders by guns blazing psychopaths, with increasing
frequency.

I totally fail to see ANYthing "well-regulated" about that.

And even if contemporary forms of gun controls aren't exactly
what they had in mind, it certainly seems to me to be WAY MORE than
enough of a valid constitutional basis for having some rational controls
in place, to avoid further scenarios like Aurora.

If only we have the will. Let's not blame the constitution. Let's expose
those who are either blind to certain parts they don't want to see, or who
are intentionally obscuring it's intent for personal gain and/or because
they are psychopaths intent on creating bloodshed and mayhem.

111 replies, 14319 views

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 111 replies Author Time Post
Reply "Well regulated" my ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Original post)
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 OP
Yeah Its Spin Jul 2012 #1
Volaris Jul 2012 #23
Tx4obama Jul 2012 #2
2on2u Jul 2012 #7
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #17
RKP5637 Jul 2012 #26
Tx4obama Jul 2012 #3
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #13
Llewlladdwr Jul 2012 #35
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #50
Llewlladdwr Jul 2012 #69
treestar Jul 2012 #99
LAGC Jul 2012 #4
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #14
permatex Jul 2012 #18
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #24
hack89 Jul 2012 #25
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #34
Llewlladdwr Jul 2012 #39
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #45
krispos42 Jul 2012 #58
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #106
Llewlladdwr Jul 2012 #71
Kaleva Jul 2012 #73
NewMoonTherian Jul 2012 #98
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #103
permatex Jul 2012 #46
rl6214 Jul 2012 #59
clffrdjk Jul 2012 #27
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #44
rl6214 Jul 2012 #60
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #83
oldhippie Jul 2012 #29
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #37
Kaleva Jul 2012 #68
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #42
Llewlladdwr Jul 2012 #33
permatex Jul 2012 #36
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #38
clffrdjk Jul 2012 #48
Kaleva Jul 2012 #70
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #87
Kaleva Jul 2012 #90
rl6214 Jul 2012 #57
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #61
rl6214 Jul 2012 #65
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #67
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #32
permatex Jul 2012 #40
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #43
oldhippie Jul 2012 #75
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #82
clffrdjk Jul 2012 #41
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #49
clffrdjk Jul 2012 #51
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #54
rl6214 Jul 2012 #62
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #66
Kaleva Jul 2012 #72
rl6214 Jul 2012 #63
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #64
samsingh Jul 2012 #77
treestar Jul 2012 #101
Confusious Jul 2012 #5
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #19
Confusious Jul 2012 #21
veganlush Jul 2012 #6
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #15
kywildcat Jul 2012 #8
pipoman Jul 2012 #9
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #16
pipoman Jul 2012 #22
EX500rider Jul 2012 #47
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #88
EX500rider Jul 2012 #91
MannyGoldstein Jul 2012 #10
Remmah2 Jul 2012 #12
HopeHoops Jul 2012 #11
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #20
RKP5637 Jul 2012 #28
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #30
RKP5637 Jul 2012 #31
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #53
RKP5637 Jul 2012 #74
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #78
RKP5637 Jul 2012 #81
EX500rider Jul 2012 #92
RKP5637 Jul 2012 #93
Hoyt Jul 2012 #52
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #84
rl6214 Jul 2012 #55
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #85
krispos42 Jul 2012 #56
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #86
samsingh Jul 2012 #76
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #79
samsingh Jul 2012 #80
LAGC Jul 2012 #100
tiny elvis Jul 2012 #89
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #94
tiny elvis Jul 2012 #95
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #96
guardian Jul 2012 #97
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #105
liberal N proud Jul 2012 #102
Shrek Jul 2012 #104
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #107
Shrek Jul 2012 #109
99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #110
DesMoinesDem Jul 2012 #108
SunsetDreams Jul 2012 #111

Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 02:43 AM

1. Damn constitution,

 

You can't yell fire in a theater but you can fire in a theater.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yeah Its Spin (Reply #1)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 05:19 PM

23. If the theater is, in fact, ON FIRE, not only are you allowed to point that out

to your fellow citizens, it's kind of EXPECTED of you as someone who is not actually a psychopath.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 02:49 AM

2. Text of the 2nd Amendment




Text

There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with slight capitalization and punctuation differences, found in the official documents surrounding the adoption of the Bill of Rights. One version was passed by the Congress, while another is found in the copies distributed to the States and then ratified by them.

As passed by the Congress:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Text




Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Reply #2)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 05:21 AM

7. Might have been necessary before we had amassed enough military hardware to

 

conquer the galaxy and blow up the entire freaking planet 100 times over. Spending a trillion times more on "defense" than the entire world combined should make you feel safe but seems it just has the opposite effect.... strange enough.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2on2u (Reply #7)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 12:08 PM

17. +100 nt

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2on2u (Reply #7)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 10:02 PM

26. Well said!!! n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Tx4obama (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:56 AM

13. Cool. Thanks for the minutia.

 

I don't mean to be dismissive; but I know it sounds that way.

This more I ponder this, the more absurd the whole thing is; largely due to
the COMPLETELY different contexts historically, especially regarding what the
words "bear arms" mean, and "militia" as well.

Arms then meant a single shot musket that took forever to reload; and now
it means assault rifles, etc.

And "militia" ??? Well, don't we already HAVE the National Guard?

And where again does it say ANYthing about "so people can to hunting"?

I think the whole Amendment should be repealed actually, or revised to
address hunting alone.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #13)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:13 PM

35. The 2nd Amendment doesn't mention hunting because hunting is completely unrelated.

The militia is mentioned because the neccessity for one is what leads to the only part of the amendment that specifies an action (or lack of, actually), said action being the non-infringment by the Federal government of the peoples right to keep and bear arms.

You're not required to be in the militia, or a hunter, or be anything other than one of the people in order to exercise your right to keep and bear arms. If you can find words in the 2nd amendment to the contrary please point them out.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #35)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:01 AM

50. So we've come full circle

 

"Well regulated" ? There's nothing I can see about how
we deal in the USA with the firearms issues, where those
words come to mind.

Well regulated?

Really?

That's just not my perception.

Viva la differance

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #50)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 02:34 AM

69. I'm sorry but I have no idea what you're trying to say in this comment. nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #35)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 02:10 PM

99. the "being" clause is clear enough

it gives the reason for the right to keep and bear arms.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 03:09 AM

4. What gun controls do you believe would have stopped the Aurora shooter?

He bought everything legally through licensed dealers. He submitted to full background checks.

What controls do you have in mind that would have stopped him, versus just inconveniencing many law-abiding gun owners?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAGC (Reply #4)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:58 AM

14. The very fact

 

that someone like Holmes COULD buy the assault rifle capable of firing
100s of rounds a minute IS the problem.

Can we say "assault rifle ban" yet?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #14)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 12:11 PM

18. He didn't have an assault rifle

 

he had a semi auto rifle. 1 bullet per 1 trigger pull.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to permatex (Reply #18)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 09:54 PM

24. It was originally a semi, but was converted to fully auto

 

matic.. simply by using a "conversion kit" easily available,
thanks to the NRA.

Is that not your understanding as well?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #24)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 09:58 PM

25. No one has said that at all. nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #25)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:12 PM

34. I AM saying it, and here's the proof.

 

Guns: ATF-Approved "Full Auto" Conversion "Kit" for the AR-15?
Read more at http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102104&page=1#BMShuZAyqXfbaLp0.99

You mean we could turn an AR-15 into a legally (for the time being) full-auto firearm by adding $320 butt-stock?

Yes, please. Click the image above to see this in action. You can get your grubby little hands on one of these puppies here.

Read more at http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102104&page=1#BMShuZAyqXfbaLp0.99

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #34)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:18 PM

39. Do you have any evidence at all that this device was used by the Colorado shooter? NT

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #39)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:26 PM

45. Given how many rounds he got off

 

despite having his AR-15 jam on him,
let's just say that is my opinion, yes.

I'd be ok with being proven wrong on
this, if you want to get back to me.

Until then, this is where I'll be, so
you know where to find me.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #45)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:51 AM

58. One bullet per second

Is reasonably fast for aimed fire from a semi-auto rifle or a handgun.

If you are fast with the finger, you can probably do up to 3 per second if you don't worry too much about aiming.


If you stick your finger through the trigger guard of the rifle and into your belt loop, you can bump-fire the gun from the hip pretty fast, but accuracy goes to shit. Although I suppose you can mount a laser sight on the gun. Might get 6 rounds a second that way.



His rifle wasn't a full auto.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #58)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 03:20 PM

106. If this isn't full-auto, the effect is certainly the same

 

This is an AR-15 that's been converted to bump-fire, making
it every bit as rapid as full auto.
&feature=related

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #45)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 02:43 AM

71. 99th_Monkey, I can't find any reports that the shooter used any sort of mechanical aid in order to

increase his rate of fire. If you find such a report please post a link. That would be good info to have.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #71)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 03:55 AM

73. This guy fired 30 rounds in about 3 secs with no mechanical aid

The gun is a semi-automatic AR-15

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #45)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 02:07 PM

98. Pull an imaginary trigger.

Count how many times you can do it in 10 seconds. Multiply by 9. 60 rounds a minute is slow. 180 rounds a minute is probably about average. That's why his stupid magazine jammed.

This doesn't prove that he didn't have a mechanical aid, but it's a heck of a lot more proof than "The device exists, so he used it."

Also, the device you linked to does not change a semiautomatic gun to a fully automatic. That's why it is legal.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewMoonTherian (Reply #98)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 03:11 PM

103. I feel you are mis-stating my point

 

my point(s) are
a) how many rounds he did get of in short period, and
b) that these conversion devices DO exist, to help explain that.

I have no knowledge certain about it, I was obviously
conjecturing, my OPINION is that he was using such a
device.

You apparently have some other OPINION, which is
fine by me.

BTW - here's a video of how the AR-15 performs with
such a device. Enjoy.
&feature=related

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #34)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:27 PM

46. I'll have to check with a relative of mine who is FBI

 

but I think these have since been made illegal by the ATF.
I'll check tomorrow.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #34)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:53 AM

59. Akins accelerator-Check the date on your info

 

Old story and determined to be illegal by the ATF. No longer available.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #24)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 10:05 PM

27. Source?

 

Where on earth did you hear that? Can it be done yea if you have a machine shop and the knowlage. But that is as illegal as anything can get.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clffrdjk (Reply #27)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:23 PM

44. source

 


"AR-15 CONVERSION (to auto) KIT" easily available on-line

Guns: ATF-Approved "Full Auto" Conversion "Kit" for the AR-15?
Read more at http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102104&page=1#BMShuZAyqXfbaLp0.99

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #44)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:53 AM

60. Old story-can't get em.

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #60)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 03:47 AM

83. So you SAY, but where the fuck is YOUR link?

 

to prove your boldface unsupported assertion that
the USA public "can't get em"?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #24)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 10:16 PM

29. Nope, not simply .....

 

Requires a machine shop (milling machine) on any modern weapon, like the S&W Holmes used. BATFE takes great pains to ensure manufacturers design and machine their receivers to make it very difficult to "convert."

Please provide a link to one of those "easily available" conversion kits.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldhippie (Reply #29)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:14 PM

37. "AR-15 CONVERSION (to auto) KIT" easily available on-line

 

Guns: ATF-Approved "Full Auto" Conversion "Kit" for the AR-15?
Read more at http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102104&page=1#BMShuZAyqXfbaLp0.99

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #37)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 02:27 AM

68. That's a bump fire device. It doesn't actually convert the gun to an automatic.

One can save about $400.00 and just learn how to "bump fire". One thing to note is that bump firing can be done with most any semi-automatic rifle and not just the AR-15 and one doesn't need to buy any kind of "conversion kit".

Here's a youtube vid of bump firing the M-1 Garand used in WWII and the Korean War.

&feature=related

Here is bump firing with the M-1 carbine.

&feature=related

Here is bump firing the semi-auto SKS, a popular hunting rifle:

&feature=endscreen&NR=1

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldhippie (Reply #29)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:20 PM

42. Ahhh? Hello? are you not aware of such on-line offers?

 

"AR-15 CONVERSION (to auto) KIT" easily available on-line

Guns: ATF-Approved "Full Auto" Conversion "Kit" for the AR-15?
Read more at http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102104&page=1#BMShuZAyqXfbaLp0.99

If you follow the link, there's a video "demonstrating" how completely "automatic" it will fire
once you purchase and install the "conversion to auto" kit.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #24)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:05 PM

33. That is complete bullshit. NT

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #24)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:13 PM

36. Modern semi autos are not easy to convert

 

Conversions kits are not easy to come by, just being in possession is a federal felony punishable by a 20 year stretch. ATF has no sense of humor at all on this subject.
Theres been no report that I've seen claiming that it was an AR-15 converted to an M-16, and to even do so you need a machine shop and knowledge in metallurgy.
If you have a link, please post it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to permatex (Reply #36)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:16 PM

38. Please explain this "conversion kit" offer on-line then.

 

"AR-15 CONVERSION (to auto) KIT" easily available on-line

Guns: ATF-Approved "Full Auto" Conversion "Kit" for the AR-15?
Read more at http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102104&page=1#BMShuZAyqXfbaLp0.99

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #38)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:30 PM

48. Again accuracy in advertising

 

Bump firing is not full auto.
Did the shooter use a bump stock?
How do you propose banning them?
And just to clarify I would be fine with these being put under NFA but only if the registry was reopened.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #38)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 02:40 AM

70. It's a bump fire device and not an actual conversion kit.

Read my post #68 and save yourself about $400.00.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1017596

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #70)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 04:14 AM

87. But the effect is pretty much the same

 

as you can see from this advertising video
&feature=related

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #87)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 09:44 AM

90. Yes. I agree.

From watching the video and from reading comments at other forums that discuss the device, it does appear it makes bump firing a gun much easier and allows the shooter to fire the gun more accurately when bump firing.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #24)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:49 AM

57. WTF? Most ignorant post on DU today.

 

Google can be your friend...It was not full auto, it was not converted to full auto, there is NO "conversion kit" easily available or otherwise thanks to ANYBODY.

"Is that not your understanding as well?"

Duh, NO.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #57)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:54 AM

61. In case you hadn't noticed

 

where I've posted this link to a site SELLING CONVERSION
KITS FOR AR-15 TO GO FROM SEMI TO AUTO.

Here is is again.
http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102104&page=1

And if you want a real thrill, just scroll down to the little video,
you can click on it to see what it looks and feels like to go "from
semi to auto" with your AR-15.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #61)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:37 AM

65. That Slide Fire Stock is NOT a full auto conversion, regardless of what the advertisement is

 

All it does is allow the trigger to bounce off your finger. Each pull of the trigger fires one projectile. That is semi-auto, not full auto. Do a little research before you make yourself sound ignorant.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #65)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:52 AM

67. Splitting hairs

 

see the video here:
http://www.bullshido.net/forums/vbtube_show.php?do=tube&tubeid=516#watch

feel the murderous NRA "anything goes gun-wise" vibe behind it.

or don't.

that is your choice.

God Bless America.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to permatex (Reply #18)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:04 PM

32. If AR-15 isn't an "assault rifle", why are vendors promoting it as such?

 

AR 15 Assault Rifles For Sale At ProGuns.com
The AR 15 can serve many functions, from military use to home security to hunting wild game. The most popular of the assault rifles, the AR 15 is perfect for any gun enthusiast looking for a well-rounded firearm.

ProGuns.com offers a wide variety of makes and models of the AR 15 rifle in both left-handed and right-handed models. As with all our firearms, ProGuns.com strives to offer only the best in quality and performance. For this reason, all the AR 15 rifles we sell are from the most dependable companies with years of experience and proven integrity. The brands we carry include Wilson Combat AR 15'S, DPMS Panther Arms, Left Handed AR15 's from Stag Arms, Bushmaster AR 15, among others. When you purchase any of our AR 15 rifles for sale, you can rest assured that it will be durable and accurate when you need it most. Also, for those states in which the gun ban is still in effect, ProGuns.com offers multiple models of the post-ban AR 15.

AR 15 Quality, Durability, and Accuracy

All of the AR 15 rifles assault rifles for sale at ProGuns.com are built with the best materials. The AR 15 rifles produced by the companies we carry are subject to exacting standards and produced by industry experts with years of experience, ensuring that when you buy guns from ProGun.com, you get the best firearm available. The quality of our AR 15 rifles shows through their durability. Able to withstand rigorous use in the field for both military and hunting uses, the AR 15 rifle is one of the toughest guns around. Whether you use it for hunting or home defense, the AR 15 is sure to last, and since many of the models we offer come with a lifetime warranty, its sure to last a lifetime.

[snip]

The AR 15 rifle is used worldwide for a reason: it’s accurate and dependable. Because the models of the AR 15 for sale on ProGuns.com are made of the best materials, they are more accurate than other rifles made from lower grade supplies. Of course, the accuracy of an assault rifle is the paramount feature.

http://www.proguns.com/assaultrifles.asp

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #32)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:18 PM

40. I don't know why they're advertising an AR-15 as an assault rifle

 

thats simply untrue, the AR-15 is the civilian version of the M-16, semi auto only, it only resembles the M-16 but the inner workings are completely different, IOW, parts are not interchangeable.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to permatex (Reply #40)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:22 PM

43. What do you make of these "AR-15 Conversion Kits" (from semi to automatic)?

 


"AR-15 CONVERSION (to auto) KIT" easily available on-line

Guns: ATF-Approved "Full Auto" Conversion "Kit" for the AR-15?
Read more at http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102104&page=1#BMShuZAyqXfbaLp0.99

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #43)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:26 PM

75. Have you ever heard of a sear?

 

Didn't think so. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Discussion is futile. Goodbye.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldhippie (Reply #75)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 03:44 AM

82. I'd like to give you full credit

 

for doing way more than your fair share,
to insure that this "discussion is futile".

Congratulations! Well done.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #32)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:19 PM

41. Accuracy in advertising who needs it.

 

But let's get back on track here. Where did you read in a report, from a source you trusted enough to repeat, that he used a full auto?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clffrdjk (Reply #41)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:32 PM

49. Given how many rounds he got off

 


despite having his AR-15 jam up on him,
let's just say that is my informed opinion,
yes.

I'd be ok with being proven wrong on this,
if you want to give it a go and get back to
me.

Until then, this is where I'll be, so
you know where to find me.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #49)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:08 AM

51. Prove your own claims that is all I asked

 

Why is that so hard?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clffrdjk (Reply #51)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:37 AM

54. I provided links

 

proving that "OMG, there really ARE 'conversion kits' to make AR-15s automatics, when
detractors were claiming otherwise.

Other than that, I have nothing to prove, other than that these kits are readily available;
and as I said elsewhere in this string, this is my informed opinion, that such a kit had been
used with the Aurora shooters AR-15, given how many rounds he was able to get off, and
how many people he was able to blow away (esp. given that his AR-15 jammed at some
point), that it had been "converted" to auto.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #54)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:57 AM

62. Not full auto, just working the trigger extremely fast

 

And the link you provided was an old one for an obsolete stock that was ruled illegal by the aTF.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #62)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:48 AM

66. I don't see any "proof" of your claims

 

that the link is "old" or "obsolete".

You may be correct, but you are basically just saying,
"trust me" every claim I utter is absolutely true.

links?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #66)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 03:05 AM

72. One still has to pull the trigger once for every round fired and then release the trigger...

before firing the next round by pulling the trigger again. An automatic gun just requires one pull of the trigger to continue firing until either the magazine is empty or the trigger is released.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #54)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:59 AM

63. Illegal

 

http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=67347

12/27/2007 03:46 PM ID: 67347 Permalink

ATF Rules Weapon Accelerator Illegal Years After Ruling it Legal
Florida: 54-year-old Bill Akins is facing financial ruin after the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms ruled that his Akins Accelerator is illegal after they ruled it was legal in 2003.

According to the ATF the device was passed because it malfunctioned when they tested it initially. It has now been ruled illegal after it was determined that the device would allow a target rifle to fire 700-rounds-per minute.

The ATF has ordered Akins to cease production of the device and turn over any parts and his customer list or face prison. "They've destroyed my dream. Eleven years of my life, gone like that," said Akins.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #63)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:11 AM

64. Poor fellow, Akins would be.

 

I can't imagine spending years of my life inventing a device that makes
a murderous weapon even more-so, and then not getting to make my
millions & billions for my effort.

I can't imagine it because that's about the last thing I would want to be
investing my time and energy into. just sayin'

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAGC (Reply #4)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:58 PM

77. i think tracking ammunition sales would have prompted an alert

the norway killer counldn't get the weapons he needed for mass murder in Norway so he bought them online from a us gun dealer who didn't really seem to care about what he was going to do.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAGC (Reply #4)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 02:10 PM

101. Licenses, renewals

Maybe nowadays, psych checks.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 04:13 AM

5. unforunatly


I read somewhere else, in all the gun threads, that a supreme decision said you don't have to belong to a well regulated militia.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Confusious (Reply #5)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 12:11 PM

19. Whatever the Framers of the Constitution meant

 

by "well-regulated", I would hazard a guess that they were NOT
envisioning what we have now, with assault rifles and such, mass
murders becoming commonplace.

BTW - where does it say anywhere in Constitution that people should
be able to bear arms so they can go hunting? nada.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #19)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 04:26 PM

21. No,

But it also doesn't say there's a right to privacy explicitly.

It's inferred.

And they probably didn't think it would come to this, but that is where we are at now.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 04:47 AM

6. the fact that they said

"well regulated", is precisely why they said "shall not be infringed". everyone knows infringement would be necessary,(age, physical and mental fitness, legal status) so they meant once you were elegible under the "well regulated" part, THEN it shall not be infringed. the well regulated militia would have it's own criteria, hence the ,regulated" designation.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to veganlush (Reply #6)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 12:00 PM

15. Seems to me we already have a National Guard, don't we?

 

and they ARE armed.

Where again does the 2nd Amendment say ANYthing about
"... so people can go hunting"? which is generally thought of
to be the rationale for having anything more than a handgun.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 05:27 AM

8. Taxes-that's how they get away with

saying they are well regulated. 99% of the gun laws currently on the books are tax laws. There are no consumer protection laws regulating guns. The obvious majority of laws covering guns are tax laws.

veteran of the million mom march here-not a popular stance in kentucky-by any means.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 06:22 AM

9. Just saying "rational controls" don't make

 

your idea of rational, rational. There are more limitations on firearms in the US than limitations on any other protected civil liberty/right. Some 10,000 federal restrictions IIRC. There is an actual standard set by SCOTUS in determining legality of this gun or that...that standard is "in common use for lawful purposes".

People are running around proclaiming this hairbrained idea or that as "reasonable" with no regard for the setting of precedent regarding regulation of civil liberties.

The term "well regulated" can be researched from a standpoint of constitutional debate and intent, but alas, so many believe they understand what it means based on their perception of the English language, even when they haven't the slightest clue.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #9)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 12:08 PM

16. I don't think the Founding Fathers had the "slightest clue"

 

... that hundreds of years later; the USA would have more military might
than all other countries combined, including a NATION GUARD that is quite
well "armed", and the ability to blow the whole planet up.

And as with so many other things, why are we Americans so "exceptional"
that it feeds an obsession with guns & violence such that we have more deaths
by guns 10x over any other nation on earth?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #16)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 05:11 PM

22. The US always has

 

had more crime than all of the countries always spouted as crime free meccas...even when these meccas had very similar firearms laws. Many of the lowest crime countries are historically ethnically monolithic societies.

No, the specifics of what would grow, the founders didn't know...they did know we would grow. They gave you a way to remedy any part which the states agree needs changing..you have much work to do..

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #16)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 11:29 PM

47. "that we have more deaths by guns 10x over any other nation on earth?"

Not even close to being true...we don't even make the top 10.

And more American's are killed by hands and feet then rifles and a lot more are killed by knives.

Here's the FBI stats for murder by type, you tell me if rifles of any type seem to be the problem:

2009 FBI Murder Statistics By Type Of Weapon Used
13,636 total murders

Murders with handguns – 6452 (47.32%)
Murders with rifles – 348 (2.55%)
Murders with shotguns – 418 (3.07%)
Murders with unknown firearms – 1928 (14.14%)
Murder with knives or cutting instruments – 1825 (13.38%)
Murders with other weapons – 1864 (13.67%)
Murders with hands, fists, feet etc.. – 801 (5.87%)

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EX500rider (Reply #47)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 04:30 AM

88. Actually we are 4th WORSE, for the record.

 

My "10X more..." statement was admittedly an over-statement,
as I got a little carried away, and was shooting from the hip,
(no pun intended).

Actually we are more like 4th Worse in the entire world; just a little
less "worse" than S. Africa, Columbia, and Thailand.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms

Please note that this post actually contains a LINK.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #88)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 12:11 PM

91. Not even...

.... customary to state those figures as "deaths per 100,000 people", of course with 300million+ people we have more total then Costa Rica...lol

The US murder rate with firearms is listed as 4.14 per 100,000 which puts us in 17th place (still not good but not even top 15) with the top 10 all having a rate of at least double ours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

And a lot of countries with more guns deaths then the US don't even make the list because nobody keeps track, like Somalia, Afghanistan and Zaire/Congo.

And those figures you linked to aren't anywhere near right anyway, Mexico has that many deaths in just one border town (over 3,000 in just Ciudad Juárez) http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/countries/americas/mexico
and had had 12,903 narcotics-related homicides in the first nine months of 2011 alone.

Also Venezuela isn't even on the list you posted and had almost 20,000 killed in 2011.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-16349118

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 07:05 AM

10. It means people who don't have regularity problems

 

As long as Americans have unfettered access to laxatives, all is well.

Nice try, gun grabber!

Best,

NRA Manny

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #10)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 08:41 AM

12. and we know that those who are not regular.................

 

are full of it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 08:37 AM

11. That's why we still have "armories", even though they aren't used that way anymore.

 

There's nothing "well regulated" about some asshole being able to score assault weapons and ammo legally. I've got guns and I'm not part of a militia, regulated or not, but mine are all practical weapons. Hunting with an assault weapon has "pussy" written all over it (sorry, but there's no other way to phrase that).

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeHoops (Reply #11)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 12:20 PM

20. Agreed.

 

It's just downright odd and bizzare that the entire justification for citizens owning
guns rests on needing a "well regulated militia" yet now, hundreds of years later,
we DO have a well regulated National Guard that is quite well armed. Not to mention
a standing armed forces capable of destroying the entire planet several times
over.

And where does is say ANYthing about citizens bearing arms "so they can go
hunting"? nada.

The whole thing is a classic example of something being written hundreds of
years ago, before the technological "advances" in weaponry, when "arms"
meant a single-shot musket that took forever to re-load.

The whole thing is ludicrous. I think 2nd Amendment needs to either be scrapped
or better yet amended to provide for hunting (rifles) and nominal self-protection
(hand guns for regular folks who need background checks to get a permit).

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #20)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 10:10 PM

28. Agree! As with many things technology has changed and our laws have

not been modified to keep pace.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #28)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 10:39 PM

30. Do you two believe that the First Amendment applies to your Internet postings?

 

Methinks your desire to amend the Constitution thanks to technological innovation is a bit, shall we say, selective...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #30)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 10:41 PM

31. The First Amendment could use some modification. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #31)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:34 AM

53. Which would be, what? Be specific...

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #53)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 11:35 AM

74. An area we need to get under control in this country is "Hate Speech for Profit." There are

Hate Jocks on the airwaves and cable, for example, that feed hatred into this nation purely for profit. Granted, this is a slippery slope.

Relative to changes to the constitution, I find it difficult to believe that what we have today will be valid ad infinitum.

PS: Of course the difficult part of any of this is who is making the changes/modifications. There are many politicians I would not want to see having anything to do with changes.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #74)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:20 PM

78. You're damn right it's a slippery slope. What do you think would happen if the RW got power?

 

Bye bye Current TV, Daily Kos, The Progressive, Mother Jones, anybody to the left of The Economist, etc.
They would all be "hate speech for profit".

So I say: Not just no, but HELL no.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #78)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:48 PM

81. We do actually agree more than we disagree! n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #31)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 12:16 PM

92. I prefer Voltaire's take on that..

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EX500rider (Reply #92)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 02:08 PM

93. Yep, the end result would be pretty bad if it were tampered with ... n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:10 AM

52. Supreme Court in Heller says restrictions are AOK. Need some more.

The NRA and gun culture can fight it in court.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #52)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 03:54 AM

84. +100 nt

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:39 AM

55. Not this tired old BS again

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #55)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 03:54 AM

85. -100 nt

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:46 AM

56. Congress sets what "well regulated" is

Currently, it's being male, between the ages of 17 and 45.




Google "10USC311".

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #56)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 03:55 AM

86. Hey! I've got a heartbeat. Where's my gun?? ~nt

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:57 PM

76. you are absolutely right. 'well regulated miltia' suggests controls, behavour, and expectations

also, the whole passage says nothing about the type of arms, location, power, ammunication, or tracking.

if the nra is so confident in the second amendment as they intreprt it (along with their cronies in courts), then why care if there are background checks and that every weapon and bullet is tracked?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samsingh (Reply #76)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:25 PM

79. Hmm, why don't you try this variant of that on for size:

 

"If the ACLU is so confident in First Amendment as they intrepret it (along with their cronies in courts), then why care if there are background checks and that every website and post is tracked?"

Does it seem so benign an idea when it's your ox getting gored?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #79)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:45 PM

80. free speech should be important to everyone

The two are not analogous.

Free speech should be protected and sometimes people who speak out are scapegoated. Fear and intimidation stifle free speech. However, i think a website that has offensive material should be tracked.

Licensing cars and pets is more analogous to gun ownership. I see nothing in the second amendment that would be violated by tracking large ammunition sales.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samsingh (Reply #80)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 02:10 PM

100. Who defines "offensive material?"

So you are in favor of Internet censorship in general? Where do you draw the line?

Just trying to understand your position here...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #79)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 05:09 AM

89. that is your ox?

who is getting gored?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tiny elvis (Reply #89)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 11:21 PM

94. Ah, an appeal to emotion from a cartoon lover. Well, here's another cartoon:

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #94)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 05:49 AM

95. that is a joke when said inappropriately. is that appeal inappropriate?

will you leave us to guess why that is ironic to you?
do you mind if i copy that cartoon and post it on the aurora massacre victims tribute page?
i will give you credit for the association
jokes are always funny regardless of context
here are some funny jokes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting

here is a joke for cool people unaffected by emotion


shall we leave life and death and horror and grief and fetishism out of the argument?
whatever it takes, say anything?



your right is my right

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tiny elvis (Reply #95)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 01:48 PM

96. You're free to imply that people that don't see things your way on guns don't care about children.

 

However, you'll be called on your Lovejoying. Not that you're in any way unique these days- there seems to be a lot of people that have suddenly developed a taste for:

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 02:05 PM

97. You are mixing apples and oranges

 

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected.

At the time the Constitution was written, regulated did not mean controlled or the contemporary of the term 'regulated'.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guardian (Reply #97)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 03:18 PM

105. We are left to guess what the Framers intended

 

My guess is that they did NOT mean that ANYONE who wanted,
could carry one of these around to fire at will.
&feature=related

The Framers had NO way of knowing how freaking nuts Americans
would be with firearms, but tend to believe that if they had had a
time machine, to see forward to our current "mass murdering"
state of mayhem that they would have been a little clearer about
what "well-regulated" means.

You have a different opinion apparently. Fine by me, but it makes
me curious if you feel the current state of frequent mass murders
would have been just A-OK with our Framers?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 02:19 PM

102. And the Gun Nuts heads explode

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 03:17 PM

104. The amendment speaks of regulating the militia

It's entirely silent on the regulation of guns, the ownership of which is guaranteed to the people.

I expect you'd find very few people who object to the idea of government regulation of the militia.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrek (Reply #104)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 03:25 PM

107. Excuse me?

 

The Framers had NO way of knowing how freaking nuts Americans
would be with firearms, but tend to believe that if they had had a
time machine, to see forward to our current "mass murdering"
state of mayhem that they would have been a little clearer about
what "well-regulated" means.

And my guess is that they would not intentionally grant every
American the "right" to carry one of these around to fire at will,
and contribute to frequent mass murders of random people.
&feature=related

You have a different opinion apparently. Fine by me, but it makes
me curious if you feel the current state of frequent mass murders
would have been just A-OK with our Framers?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #107)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 03:37 PM

109. I have no way to know

Perhaps they would have considered the prospect of mass murder to be sufficient reason to omit the second amendment.

Or maybe they would have decided it to be an acceptable trade-off for a bulwark against tyranny.

In any event, I think they knew they weren't infallibly prescient, which is why they included Article V. We can repeal or modify the second amendment any time we decide it has outlived its usefulness.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrek (Reply #109)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 03:49 PM

110. True. And I'm totally in support of that

 

i.e. amending 2nd Amendment so it takes into account, that:

a) we already have a National Guard, which I consider
a super well-regulated militia, and is quite well-armed.

and

b) that Americans obsession with guns has run amok and we
need them to be "well regulated" in order to keep them out
of the hands of people likely to misuse them.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrek (Reply #104)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 03:30 PM

108. +1

 

Unfortunately, the ignorance displayed by the OP is far too common.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Original post)

Fri Jul 27, 2012, 04:28 PM

111. Locking

Locking

Statement of Purpose

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.


Please consider posting in Gun Control & RKBA group.

Thanks for your understanding

SunsetDreams
GD Host


FYI Skinner announcement to hosts this morning.
Skinner (56,085 posts)

You can once again enforce the prohibition against gun threads in GD.

I think it is clear that members' interest in discussing Guns has died down, and we are now focusing on other issues. (Thanks, Mitt!) So you can once again start enforcing the prohibition against gun threads in GD.

Of course, if you do want to lock any threads about guns, you should probably discuss it in here before you do.

FWIW, my personal opinion is that some narrowly-targeted discussion of the tragedy in Colorado might still be on-topic for GD. But we no longer need to provide an open environment in GD for all gun discussion.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink