LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Why does anyone NEED an assault rifle?

IrezumiKiss said:
I don't give a shit about being a source of your stomach knots or not. I'm laughing at you. Dassit.

See, it's never personal, Hitchcraft. I laugh at all the schmucks that drive thru here.

Eventually you'll move on, another one will take your place because nature abhors a vacuum and I'll be laughing at them, too. :D
Click to expand...
So you admit that your avocation is to be an ass hole troll.
 
DeviatedOne said:
Nonetheless, the USSC already defined the "militia" as it is used in the 2A is every single US citizen, whether they like it or not, and whether they are in the military or not.
Click to expand...
A ridiculous interpretation. Hope to see it corrected. It can be changed.
 
Gamine67 said:
Are you completely unaware of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 and the major rewrites that were implemented?

It’s way past time for another Constitutional Convention to align the document with the country as it currently exists.

Many of the participants were people call “Founding Fathers” and they were bright enough to say “oops” and hit the ”RESET” key.

It you told one of them that 235 years later we still haven’t had another Constitutional Convention I doubt they’d be impressed, even they knew they weren’t perfect.
Click to expand...
The Second Amendment doesn't need a constitutional change. The current ruling is an obvious misinterpretation. It only needs to be interpreted correctly in a new ruling.
 
TrailerHitch said:
Your opinion is your opinion. I happen to believe the Founding Fathers were genius in their forming of this new nation. There is a process to change the Constitution and Amendments have been written. I do not believe that abandoning the entire Constitution is a prudent move.
Click to expand...
Lets back up and unpack this little back and forth shall we? Below is the original postings
TrailerHitch said:
Not me. If you hold to the true definition that it must be select fire, full auto capable.
Click to expand...
So here above we have your original post. In it you state that it is "your opinion"(not me in bold) that assault weapons must be capable of "full auto".
For those who are not familiar with the term "full auto". That means when selected, if you hold the trigger, the weapon discharges continuously until the magazine is empty.
Fuzzy1975 said:
"An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine."

Nowhere does the definition claim full auto. Add a bump stock to an AR-15 and it is virtually full auto.

Not to mention with today's 3D printers, you can easily make a store bought AR-15 full auto by printing a conversion kit.
Click to expand...
Now in my reply above I quote the US military's definition, which says "select fire", but not what the select fire is. ( in bold)

Again for those not familiar with military weapons, this means a switch,which has at least two settings, but sometimes 3. One setting is "semi auto", which will cause the weapon to discharge a bullet each time the trigger is pulled, the second setting is usually 3 round burst, which means for each pull of the trigger the weapon will fire 3 bullets in a row.

Some, but not all military grade weapons have a third setting which is "full auto" as I described earlier.

I then further explain that with today's non military AR-15's, with the addition of a bump stock,they fire in a manner that mimics "full auto" since the bumping action cause the rifle to buck against the holders finger, causing the weapon to discharge, without the shooter needing to keep squeezing the trigger.

Last, there are plans on the internet, which quickly and cheaply allow anyone with a 3D printer to modify an non military AR-15 rifle to auto fire, without the need for a bump stock device.
Fuzzy1975 said:
Hey now your shooting the messenger.....lol I posted the definition right from the US Army. Your beef is obviously with them.
Click to expand...
So, you are trying to shoot the messenger, why, well since the US army doesn't agree with your "opinion" and I don't agree with your opinion, is about the only reason I can think of.

I await your next idiotic response, since your posting history has shown you have a tendency to do so when confronted with facts you disagree with.
 
Last edited:
Looks like we've entered the "differences between full-auto massacres vs. semi-auto massacres" portion of the debate. As if 10 deaths in 5 seconds vs 10 deaths in 20 seconds is a distinction. :rolleyes:
 
RobDownSouth said:
Looks like we've entered the "differences between full-auto massacres vs. semi-auto massacres" portion of the debate. As if 10 deaths in 5 seconds vs 10 deaths in 20 seconds is a distinction. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Trust me, I am not debating that. Trashhitch might be.

You don't need an assault rifle to to kill 10 people in 5 seconds. Plenty of handguns and semi auto's out there that would be just as effective.
 
Fuzzy1975 said:
Trust me, I am not debating that. Trashhitch might be.

You don't need an assault rifle to to kill 10 people in 5 seconds. Plenty of handguns and semi auto's out there that would be just as effective.
Click to expand...
Sorry you got caught in teh crossfire (pun semi-intended). I agree with you that the butcher's bill is the same for both the rare full-automatic as the common semi-automatic. Pull the trigger fast enough and you're a "manly" killer.
 
IrezumiKiss said:
I don't give a shit about being a source of your stomach knots or not. I'm laughing at you. Dassit.

See, it's never personal, Hitchcraft. I laugh at all the schmucks that drive thru here.

Eventually you'll move on, another one will take your place because nature abhors a vacuum and I'll be laughing at them, too. :D
Click to expand...
I'm not going anywhere. No matter how hard you fight to drive me away.
 
Fuzzy1975 said:
Lets back up and unpack this little back and forth shall we? Below is the original postings

So here above we have your original post. In it you state that it is "your opinion"(not me in bold) that assault weapons must be capable of "full auto".
For those who are not familiar with the term "full auto". That means when selected, if you hold the trigger, the weapon discharges continuously until the magazine is empty.

Now in my reply above I quote the US military's definition, which says "select fire", but not what the select fire is. ( in bold)

Again for those not familiar with military weapons, this means a switch,which has at least two settings, but sometimes 3. One setting is "semi auto", which will cause the weapon to discharge a bullet each time the trigger is pulled, the second setting is usually 3 round burst, which means for each pull of the trigger the weapon will fire 3 bullets in a row.

Some, but not all military grade weapons have a third setting which is "full auto" as I described earlier.

I then further explain that with today's non military AR-15's, with the addition of a bump stock,they fire in a manner that mimics "full auto" since the bumping action cause the rifle to buck against the holders finger, causing the weapon to discharge, without the shooter needing to keep squeezing the trigger.

Last, there are plans on the internet, which quickly and cheaply allow anyone with a 3D printer to modify an non military AR-15 rifle to auto fire, without the need for a bump stock device.

So, you are trying to shoot the messenger, why, well since the US army doesn't agree with your "opinion" and I don't agree with your opinion, is about the only reason I can think of.

I await your next idiotic response, since your posting history has shown you have a tendency to do so when confronted with facts you disagree with.
Click to expand...
No need to respond you counter your own posts without my help. Do carry on.
 
Last edited:
coati said:
Oh, you are referring to the decision by the current Federalist-Society-dominated court, the one that tries to divine the "originalist" meaning of the messengers from God (the "Founding Fathers").

Well, let's take that orginalism a little further, because the Founding Fathers did not include the majority of people in America as US citizens, so their intention was not to arm "every single US citizen". It was to arm a "well-regulated" militia.

Assholes spraying bullets every time they get cut off in traffic is obviously not the definition of a well-regulated militia. So much for the validity of originalism. The people are revolting in mass against the insanity of the Deplorables and their perversion of the U.S. Judicial system.
Click to expand...
Well, if you are a US citizens, you are part of the militia regardless.

Enjoy it as a perk, or shit on it some more. 😂
 
My I said:
Let me answer that question WITH a question... or three... or four.....

Why does anyone NEED a Lamborghini or a Hummer?

Why does anyone NEED a 68 Camaro Z28 with a 427 and a 4 speed?

Why does anyone NEED a 96" TV to watch "reality" shows?

Why does anyone NEED a $4000 Armani suit? Or $800 shoes?

Why does anyone NEED a Jet-Ski? or a 4-wheeler?

Why does anyone NEED a $10,000 diamond bracelet?

The truth is we don't NEED any of those things. As human beings we need basic food, shelter and enough clothing to keep from freezing to death. Anything beyond that is a personal choice.

Aaaahhhh.... Personal choice. THE very, most BASIC of our rights in The United States of America. We have the freedom to choose the things we like. No one dictates to us what we wear, what we eat, what we drive, what we can say....

Oh... wait... There are people who like to misinform us and say things like "the vegan diet is the healthiest diet on the planet" and that everyone must stop eating animal based foods. We have people telling us that we can't wear fur or leather. We have people telling us we must drive economical cars. And we have people who tell us that we can't oppose what they say because THEY have freedom of speech. (as if anyone opposed does not)

Those people want to strip your rights from you to force you live THEIR lifestyle whether you want to or not. Forget your basic freedom of choice. They are doing what is "Best" for you. THAT is true fascism, my friends. And it is unconstitutional.

Want to know what else is unconstitutional? Punishing innocent people for the actions of others. What if I took your "smart" phone away from you and told you you could never have another because someone down the street was texting and driving and hit another car and killed 5 people? Would that be fair? What if I took your car and told you you could never drive again because hundreds of thousands of people die in car crashes every year? would that be fair? What about shutting down the internet because some people cyberbully others? Or watch porn? Would that be fair? Or banning fast food restaurants because they cause obesity? Would that be fair?

And now because an insane boy was able to purchase a rifle and shot up a school, you want to take those rifles away from law abiding, perfectly sane people. And further, you want to force people to have psychological exams to even purchase a gun. What other right in our constitution requires that? Do you have to prove you are sane or even know what you are talking about before you can stage a public protest/march/rally?

Perhaps you should have to. Given the amount of misinformation (and flat out lies) that are spread, maybe that would be best. Or maybe we just make it a Federal Felony Offense to knowingly spread misinformation in public forums/media/gatherings.

Tell you what I'll do. I'll give if you do. I'll accept a ban on the so called assault weapons if YOU accept a ban on cellular devices that can be operated while traveling at more than 3mph.

But I know you won't. Because YOU have rights. YOU have freedom of choice. And you don't mind trampling everyone else's rights and freedoms as long as you get to keep yours.

So here's a simpler solution. Why don'r we ALL stop destroying things just because we don't personally like them? That sounds fair to me. How 'bout you?
Click to expand...
Looks like this case was ruled on today. Based on the constitution.
 
DeviatedOne said:
Nonetheless, the USSC already defined the "militia" as it is used in the 2A is every single US citizen, whether they like it or not, and whether they are in the military or not.
Click to expand...
In doing so they conveniently ignored the 'well regulated' part.
Cherry-picking bits they like, much like any superstitious person with their book of rules.
 
TrailerHitch said:
No surrender, but if you counter your own arguments all I need to do is point out your inconsistencies.
Click to expand...
Again, thanks for your surrender. but please keep on denying that you did. That fits with your M.O. perfectly.

Or you can go back and try and point out the inconsistencies...Your choice....*chuckles*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DanOkeffie
Shame on anyone and everyone that's a democrat
3 4 5
Replies
118
Views
1K
YDB95
YDB95
DanOkeffie
WTF Just discovered the retard Joe Biden gave China the plans for the Thorium Nuclear reactor
Replies
1
Views
35
DanOkeffie
DanOkeffie
LilKitKat
Plenary authority
3 4 5
Replies
110
Views
1K
stxjimmy
S
SkyBubble
WHAT ANTIFA BELIEVES
3 4 5
Replies
110
Views
1K
DanOkeffie
DanOkeffie
DanOkeffie
U.S. Dept of Energy - get your head out of your ass and the love of dildo's
Replies
0
Views
42
DanOkeffie
DanOkeffie
Back
Top