• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How the AR-15 conquered America, as revealed by an industry insider

ttwtt78640 said:
Those are partisan and emotional talking points. Using either “gun crime”, “mass shooting” or homicide US statistics shows that “assault rifles“ or rifles of any kind are used in a minority of all of those types of crime.

Handguns, by far, are the gun of choice for criminal abuse, but it is politically impossible to call for a nationwide handgun ban and the legal age to buy a handgun is already 21.

That fact drives the “reasonable restriction” (gun banner) folks crazy, so they must seek to establish the legal precedent that the ‘criminal abuse’ of a specific type of gun far less popular than handguns creates a ‘compelling state interest’ permitting a ban of that specific type of gun without repeal of the 2A.

Anyone pointing this out is said to be a ‘slippery slope‘ conspiracy nut to help ensure that such a completely logical argument be dismissed out of hand.
Click to expand...
It's not so much that it should be dismissed out of hand as it is it shouldn't even be brought in the first place.
 
j brown's body said:
The article doesn't really have anything to do with gun crimes or mass shootings.
Click to expand...
Quite the bloodbath at the Michigan capitol huh, and oh those really, really scary flags Jan. 6
From reading it you seem to think it does or is some kind of catalyst for it with ARs being the star.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Those are partisan and emotional talking points. Using either “gun crime”, “mass shooting” or homicide US statistics shows that “assault rifles“ or rifles of any kind are used in a minority of all of those types of crime.

Handguns, by far, are the gun of choice for criminal abuse, but it is politically impossible to call for a nationwide handgun ban and the legal age to buy a handgun is already 21.

That fact drives the “reasonable restriction” (gun banner) folks crazy, so they must seek to establish the legal precedent that the ‘criminal abuse’ of a specific type of gun far less popular than handguns creates a ‘compelling state interest’ permitting a ban of that specific type of gun without repeal of the 2A.

Anyone pointing this out is said to be a ‘slippery slope‘ conspiracy nut to help ensure that such a completely logical argument be dismissed out of hand.
Click to expand...
I wonder if this isn't a meme effect. Ignoramus is in the media run their mouths stupidly about how dangerous a particular rifle is and some people will probably pick that firearm because of that.
 
j brown's body said:
The article doesn't really have anything to do with gun crimes or mass shootings.
Click to expand...
The article strikes me as ignorant and it seems it was written by people who don't know what they're talking about.

The AR-15 is just a rifle that's it.
 
CLAX1911 said:
The article strikes me as ignorant and it seems it was written by people who don't know what they're talking about.

The AR-15 is just a rifle that's it.
Click to expand...
Weird how it’s the rifle of choice for mass shootings by psychos.

Must just be coincidence. Just like how mass shootings spiked after the assault weapons ban wasn’t renewed. Pure chance! Amirite?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Those are partisan and emotional talking points. Using either “gun crime”, “mass shooting” or homicide US statistics shows that “assault rifles“ or rifles of any kind are used in a minority of all of those types of crime.

Handguns, by far, are the gun of choice for criminal abuse, but it is politically impossible to call for a nationwide handgun ban and the legal age to buy a handgun is already 21.

That fact drives the “reasonable restriction” (gun banner) folks crazy, so they must seek to establish the legal precedent that the ‘criminal abuse’ of a specific type of gun far less popular than handguns creates a ‘compelling state interest’ permitting a ban of that specific type of gun without repeal of the 2A.

Anyone pointing this out is said to be a ‘slippery slope‘ conspiracy nut to help ensure that such a completely logical argument be dismissed out of hand.
Click to expand...

Handguns have some legitimate role in personal defense. There is no possible legitimate use of the AR15 for civilian use. They are way too much firepower for personal defense, and way too little in case of an invading military. Their niche is to really take out large numbers of civilians and soft targets quickly and efficiently.
 
ataraxia said:
Handguns have some legitimate role in personal defense. There is no possible legitimate use of the AR15 for civilian use. They are way too much firepower for personal defense, and way too little in case of an invading military. Their niche is to really take out large numbers of civilians and soft targets quickly and efficiently.
Click to expand...

Hmm… is that why we issue them to LEOs?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Law Enforcement Officers.
Click to expand...

Because
1) they are not fighting an invading army
2) because they have been extensively screened, trained, and held accountable for their use of the weapon.

Unlike, for example, this guy:
www.cnn.com

8-year-old is killed by South Carolina man shooting randomly at cars, police say | CNN

A South Carolina man has been charged with murder after authorities say he" fired multiple random rounds at passing vehicles," resulting in the death of 8-year-old Quarius Dunham.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
 
ataraxia said:
Because
1) they are not fighting an invading army
2) because they have been extensively screened, trained, and held accountable for their use of the weapon.

Unlike, for example, this guy:
www.cnn.com

8-year-old is killed by South Carolina man shooting randomly at cars, police say | CNN

A South Carolina man has been charged with murder after authorities say he" fired multiple random rounds at passing vehicles," resulting in the death of 8-year-old Quarius Dunham.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
Click to expand...

That doesn't support your statement.
 
ataraxia said:
Handguns have some legitimate role in personal defense. There is no possible legitimate use of the AR15 for civilian use. They are way too much firepower for personal defense, and way too little in case of an invading military. Their niche is to really take out large numbers of civilians and soft targets quickly and efficiently.
Click to expand...
There are lots of legitimate uses for an AR-15. If 5.56mm or .223 caliber is not your cup of tea, there is also the AR-7, AR-10, and AR-12 and they each are capable of firing different calibers. Using the standard 5.56mm round the AR-15 makes for an excellent varmint rifle. Due to its light weight and the speed at which it is propelled the round has a very flat trajectory and can be shot very accurately. Overall, the AR platform - regardless of caliber - is superior to the more traditional wooden rifles. Not only are the ARs lighter, the synthetic stock can take more abuse than wooden stocks.

Should I ever replace my Springfield 1903, it will most likely be with an AR-10 chambered for the same caliber.
 
A military sniper is trained to take out the highest ranking officers in an enemy group. They prioritise the most potent targets before moving on to those at the periphery. Likewise a criminal sniper will aim to take out the strongest members so that they won't pose a threat when they attack the weaker ones. So being conspicuously armed isn't always an advantage when it comes to self-defence.


Screenshot_20220603-132748_YouTube.jpg
Rooftop sniper - John Wick 2014
 
Screenshot_20220603-191216_Chrome.jpg
Willem Dafoe - Night sniper scene

Don't snooze or close your eyes on an outdoor seat or you won't be able to see a potential gunman! Anyone walking down a street in Manhattan would really have to spend 10 minutes looking at each skyscraper to ensure there's no sniper lurking in any of its 50+ floors. Not only do you've to analyse 360° in the horizontal direction but an additional 90° or so along the vertical axis. This isn't achievable without dozens of bodyguards.




Gunned Down - Public Enemies (10/10) Movie CLIP (2009)

In order to see that no one has their guns drawn on a street we'd almost have to socially distance everyone much like what happend during the Covid pandemic!



Glitch said:
Not only are the ARs lighter, the synthetic stock can take more abuse than wooden stocks.
Click to expand...

Anyone with a black labrador will know that they're almost impossible to see in the distance if you let them off the lead at night. Camouflaging a rifle with paint will make it resemble a mere metal pole in a civilian context.
 
Last edited:
j brown's body said:
the AR-15 has come to embody something like a rejection of civil society, a kind of totem of authoritarian dominance. AR-15 as totem was central to 1/6 and militia protests in Michigan.
Click to expand...

It would be a major inconvenience for a group of civilians to split themselves in two to create an overwatch team and a leading unit. We'd never be able to relax if we had to be fully attentive to the risk of gun violence.

Screenshot_20220603-200716_Chrome.jpg
(educalingo website - overwatch definition)
 
A sniper rifle is in some sense the most egalitarian weapon there is since it's merely a basic rifle with a scope attached onto it. It might seem like an unfair and sneaky weapon solely because the victims are often only equipped with shorter range weapons. Yet this apparent slyness is kind of an illusion because many soldiers are freely choosing to carry submachine guns and lighter assault rifles rather than sniper rifles. It seems to me that a sniper rifle should really be thought of as the default weapon. Perhaps we should only indulge in faster rates of fire if either you have another sniper on your team to cover you or else if the battles are guaranteed to be entirely short-range like an indoor shootout for example. So sniper rifles are probably more important than AR-15s when it comes to combatting a potential tyrannical government. The lone wolf mentality of a sniper is more in tune with the self-reliant mindset of the second amendment.

"Ukrainian sniper Olen Bilozerska compared the early days of fighting the Russian army to being on a "safari," and insisted Ukraine would eventually win the war despite the tactics employed by the Russian forces."
https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-sniper-olena-bilozerska-safari-russia-war-1708178
 
The military use the same basic platform, it will be interesting to see how many civilian versions of the NGSW sell now in 6.8mm.
 

Le Castle Vania - The Red Circle (John Wick club scene)

We talk about how guns are fuelling the drug cartel wars in South America but what about the other way round? How much gun violence is attributable to drug-induced irrationality? How much cartel violence is caused by the sellers getting high on their very own drugs? If the war on drugs is doomed then so too is the effort to stop mass shootings unless gun control is to be unforced. Violence is itself a drug. Life isn't fair and so we can't trust that good people will always do good and allow everyone to be intensely armed.
 
Last edited:
"Authorities said officers assigned to the 200 block of South Street heard the initial gunfire and quickly responded. Upon arrival, officers found several gunshot victims and an unknown man firing into a crowd of people, said Philadelphia Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw during a Sunday afternoon briefing."
https://6abc.com/south-street-mass-shooting-philadelphia-philly-gun-violence-queen-village/11932329/

Had police snipers already been at the scene before another mass shooting like the 2017 concert at Las Vegas, then there still would've been perhaps 10 deaths by the time the police would get into a position to have returned fire.
 
Michael McMahon said:
"Authorities said officers assigned to the 200 block of South Street heard the initial gunfire and quickly responded. Upon arrival, officers found several gunshot victims and an unknown man firing into a crowd of people, said Philadelphia Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw during a Sunday afternoon briefing."
https://6abc.com/south-street-mass-shooting-philadelphia-philly-gun-violence-queen-village/11932329/

Had police snipers already been at the scene before another mass shooting like the 2017 concert at Las Vegas, then there still would've been perhaps 10 deaths by the time the police would get into a position to have returned fire.
Click to expand...

Police could have returned effective fire from that Las Vegas concert ?

You mean peppering the Mandalay hotel with shots ?
 
Rich2018 said:
You mean peppering the Mandalay hotel with shots ?
Click to expand...
Shooting not with random covering fire but with high precision shots with sniper rifles.

Rich2018 said:
Police could have returned effective fire from that Las Vegas concert ?
Click to expand...
I mean there still would've been scores of civilian deaths in the "idealised" scenario of the security guards being armed with sniper rifles even before the mass shooter fired the first shot. It would still have taken some time for a sniper to get into a safe position and use their scope to find the murderer in his hotel room.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom