General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (OhNo-Really) on Sat Dec 10, 2022, 11:01 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
riversedge
(70,193 posts)Response to riversedge (Reply #1)
OhNo-Really This message was self-deleted by its author.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)Marengo
(3,477 posts)OhNo-Really
(3,985 posts)ADX
(1,622 posts)...There is NO WAY any retailer would offer that Surefire 60-round magazine for $20 or less because dealer cost is WAY above that.
If you go back and look at the website page you included with your post, you'll see that the price is $129.00.
OhNo-Really
(3,985 posts)Drahthaardogs
(6,843 posts)None.
maxsolomon
(33,310 posts)"Shall not infringe" is the only part of the 2nd they see. Yet we limit access to full-autos, and RPGs...
Response to OhNo-Really (Original post)
SQUEE This message was self-deleted by its author.
Marengo
(3,477 posts)ADX
(1,622 posts)Buy low, sell high!
By the way, Semper Fi, Devil Dog...
Marengo
(3,477 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)No doubt, you'd pretend your purchase relevant as well.
Marengo
(3,477 posts)ADX
(1,622 posts)...and would consider my purchase to be completely relevant because I believe in the free market tenet of buying low and selling high.
If you have a problem with high-cap mags then don't buy 'em but don't fix your mouth to tell me or others what we need to do or how we need to feel.
Get it?
Got it?
Good...
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,174 posts)ADX
(1,622 posts)That being said though, what I'm definitely NOT is someone who suffers sarcastic bullshit from fools gladly.
Have a great day...
k2qb3
(374 posts)There are billions of magazines in circulation, they're not disposable items, they last a very long time.
The "AR bullets are super destructive" bit applies to any rifle. All firearms are "military-style", it's just a question of how out of date they are.
The AR-15 is the weapon in current common use, which is exactly what the Miller decision says the second amendment protects. If you get rid of it, there would be another common use weapon, all the way back to sticks and stones.
It isn't effectiveness that limits these kinds of incidents. It's the will to destruction. Most of these killers run out of will before they run out of opportunity. It's difficult to think like a psychopath but the exercise is instructive. A mass killing can be achieved in an infinite number of ways.
The potential for violence is inherent in the meaningful use of the word "No". We've all lived under the protection of the equalized potential for violence for so long we don't realize how much we benefit from it, despite it's tragic downside.
Pulling our own teeth will not make us safer. These technical details aren't the real issue, and won't result in a real solution.
GeorgeGist
(25,319 posts)but to repeal the Second Ammendment.
k2qb3
(374 posts)The disagreement is rooted at the deepest, philosophical or even theological level, and we're arguing emotionally over technical trivialities over social media. It's not just pointless it's counterproductive.
What really worries me about this subject is so few people understand what they're dealing with, how fundamental the difference actually is and how serious people will take poorly constructed solutions.
If you really care about making progress on this issue, the place to start is with the exemptions for civilian government agencies within existing law. That's the violation of fundamental principles that's been poisoning debate on this issue going all the way back to the National Firearms Act in 1934.
People aren't going to be responsive to this kind of technical solution so long as they're attached to the claim that government shouldn't be bound by them. There isn't any legitimate need for full-auto in law enforcement. Or for any of the other technical laws that don't apply to the people enforcing them.
The reason the '94 AWB ended up being so counterproductive, practically and politically, was all the "law enforcement only" stamps on everything. That's also why it had zero practical effect on the availability of the items as long as people were willing to violate the law.
A lot of the extremism on this subject, on both sides is rooted right there. Are revolvers and shotguns and such sufficient for the defense of self and others? I don't know, but I know you can't have it both ways under American legal and cultural tradition, and I know we can never eliminate the availability of more effective weaponry to people willing to violate the law to obtain it.
Exotica
(1,461 posts)Last edited Thu Feb 22, 2018, 06:11 PM - Edit history (1)
https://www.impactguns.com/hexmag-ar-15-black-finish-30rd-085992200706.aspxSick!!! So fucked up.
300 rounds at the go for murder for only 86 usd plus the ammo cost
OhNo-Really
(3,985 posts)here's a bunch
aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)Yes, rifle bullets typically damage the body even more than pistol bullets.
I'm ok with youths (girls and boys) learning to shoot in supervised situations. I can't help but be impressed by the 13-year old girl.
Dana... what can I say... she's NRA.
maxsolomon
(33,310 posts)It would be helpful to know that DU's Gunner crew is on the side of sanity.
aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)I've always said that I've hated that part of the NRA strategy. I may be more RKBA then most members on this forum but crazy talk is still crazy talk
Eliot Rosewater
(31,109 posts)smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)I would give anything to live in Europe. I have had it with this country. There are just too many sick people here and they seem to be taking over.
OhNo-Really
(3,985 posts)probably backed by Putin no less
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)He had LOTS of them.
Ban them.
OhNo-Really
(3,985 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)It used to be that AR's and large cap mags were rarely used in crime.
That's changed. They are now the standard issue gear for mass shooters.