Difference between civilian firearms and dangerous AR-style ASSAULT WEAPON.

[MusicForTheDeaf]

This photo showcases the difference between civilian hunting/sporting rifles, and DANGEROUS AR/MILITARY-STYLE ASSAULT WEAPONS.

As you can see, one of these weapons are perfectly acceptable for civilian ownership, and the other is only suitable for military use.

 

[AnomalyLady]

This photo showcases the difference between civilian hunting/sporting rifles, and DANGEROUS AR/MILITARY-STYLE ASSAULT WEAPONS.

As you can see, one of these weapons are perfectly acceptable for civilian ownership, and the other is only suitable for military use.

Are you referencing something in specific or just trying to start a firearms conversation?

 

[Bn2f]

 

[OldSoldier96]

Same weapon. Differences in hand grips and look means nothing unless you are completely uninformed about firearms.

 

[SissyBrandi19]

This photo showcases the difference between civilian hunting/sporting rifles, and DANGEROUS AR/MILITARY-STYLE ASSAULT WEAPONS.

As you can see, one of these weapons are perfectly acceptable for civilian ownership, and the other is only suitable for military use.

Oh yeah...totally obvious by looking at that...(oh gawd what a fool!)

 

[eric_erosfan]

This photo showcases the difference between civilian hunting/sporting rifles, and DANGEROUS AR/MILITARY-STYLE ASSAULT WEAPONS.

As you can see, one of these weapons are perfectly acceptable for civilian ownership, and the other is only suitable for military use.

 

[Politruk]

Prottip: When people talk of banning assault weapons, and you start nitpicking the definition of "assault weapon," that makes you the asshole.

 

[Politruk]

There is no legitimate reason for a civilian to have an automatic rifle of any kind -- that's more firepower than you need for home defense, and unsporting for hunting.

 

[OldSoldier96]

Shall not be infringed. Home defense against what? By all means if Trump became a dictator you might want automatic weapons. But hey, limit yourself against a tyrannical government . I won’t.

 

[eric_erosfan]

There is no legitimate reason for a civilian to have an automatic rifle of any kind -- that's more firepower than you need for home defense, and unsporting for hunting.

I have a bolt-action varmint rifle. I feel like Lee Harvey Oswald taking down a coyote. But those few times I don't drop them in one shot, I suddenly wish it was semi-auto because I hate to see these animals scurrying off not able to use a leg.

 

[Politruk]

Shall not be infringed. Home defense against what? By all means if Trump became a dictator you might want automatic weapons. But hey, limit yourself against a tyrannical government . I won’t.

Your firearms are politically useless. You will never use them against government forces, including your local police, with any hope of victory at all. Having automatic rifles would make no difference in that regard.

 

[OldSoldier96]

Battle of Athens states otherwise. Also Vietnam and Afghanistan prove you don’t need a superior firepower to push out a foreign occupier. Just go curl up in the corner and give up attitude there. We need to improve upon that.

 

[Politruk]

Battle of Athens states otherwise. Also Vietnam and Afghanistan prove you don’t need a superior firepower to push out a foreign occupier. Just go curl up in the corner and give up attitude there. We need to improve upon that.

No terrain in the United States is suitable for guerilla warfare. And "fourth-generation warfare" will never exist.

 

[Lance_Castro]

What kind of motor oil is best?

 

[OldSoldier96]

No terrain in the United States is suitable for guerilla warfare.

Got first hand knowledge of that? I’m curious. The U.S. has a lot of terrain that’s perfect for guerilla warfare.

 

[eric_erosfan]

What kind of motor oil is best?

Personal lubricant lance we keep telling you. That's why they keep running away from you screaming.

 

[Lazaran]

This photo showcases the difference between civilian hunting/sporting rifles, and DANGEROUS AR/MILITARY-STYLE ASSAULT WEAPONS.

As you can see, one of these weapons are perfectly acceptable for civilian ownership, and the other is only suitable for military use.

The main difference is: The bottom gun is the weapon of choice of wannabe-soldier-bois who sometimes decide to cosplay soldier-bois in elementary schools, malls, movie theaters, concerts, supermarkets, nightclubs, etc, etc, etc (they sometimes use them to self-terminate as well).





Hope that ^ helps.





We. Told. Them. So.

 

[Politruk]

Got first hand knowledge of that? I’m curious. The U.S. has a lot of terrain that’s perfect for guerilla warfare.

No jungle here. Can't maneuver in the deserts or badlands -- too easy to spot from the air. Not even the Rocky Mountains are suitable.

 

[lliicckkss]

just bring back muskets

 

[OldSoldier96]

No jungle here. Can't maneuver in the deserts or badlands -- too easy to spot from the air. Not even the Rocky Mountains are suitable.

Incorrect on all the above as well as not understanding urban warfare as well probably because you never have experience it up close.

 

[OldSoldier96]

just bring back muskets

They are call M-16’s now.

 

[Politruk]

Incorrect on all the above as well as not understanding urban warfare as well probably because you never have experience it up close.

Cities are where the government forces would be based.

 

[OldSoldier96]

I definitely can tell you have little experience of war. No, they’ll set up outside the city and try to patrol its streets. Cities are very difficult to control and hold. A lot of spots to hide and great spots to place IEDs and more. The government won’t bomb them. They still need people to control and won’t risk damaging infrastructure unless they are to the point of losing.

 

[MusicForTheDeaf]

This man's CHILD was KILLED by an ASSAULT WEAPON at SANDY HOOK.

 

[Politruk]

This man's CHILD was KILLED by an ASSAULT WEAPON at SANDY HOOK.

That kid is a crisis actor!