Jump to content

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
  • Announcements

    • Dowin

      =ADK= Discord Link   04/24/2017

      Come join us in =ADK= Discord To download the Discord app go here: https://discordapp.com/   Discord is going to have a small learning curve over teamspeak so be prepared, but the fellow members as well as the Admins will gladly help you if you have any issues with installing or using the app. Once you have Discord installed all that's left to do is click the button below.   Welcome to the future of the =ADK= Community.   Click Here To Join! 
s0ck37

Your take on the proposed Assault weapons ban?

Recommended Posts

I guess this is long and drawn out at this point. I don't see how this is going to stop any on going threat..I'm going to bullet point a few things


-High cap mags - Yea fucking right, I can reload my 1911 race gun in under a second...Cap me at 10? My gun is already capped, and it hasn't slowed me down once. I can combat reload any of my AR's nearly just as fast. What's the killing ability difference between having 10, 20, or 30 on tap? The risk for jamming is still there because of cheap mag springs.

- Assault rifle Ban - Another along the same lines, where is the line drawn...All a "evil black rifle" has over another is the colour and the ability to add funky things like a VFG, along with weird lasers and tac lights. A mini 14 can kill just as easy (Think columbine...) and it doesn't have the "Evil" rails on it like an AR-15 does.

my conclusion? You can't stop evil, ban AR-15's, ban AK-47's...we still have sticks and stones, knives and hammers. You can't ban evil, it always has a way. All a ban does, is stop law abiding people such as my self from being able to legally obtain a certain rifle or magazine.

The irony? Connecticut has nearly the same version as the '94 AWB in place as state law, and it didn't stop that nut ball from doing what he did. Where does it end? When do we ban bad parenting?

At this point, I look at the war on drugs, and believe with the governments ability to not win that one, with the new war on guns. They won't win, they won't stop evil, it won't matter much.

That said, I own 6 AR-15's...two are SBR's, and I have a couple cans to match. I also ordered a case of P-mags after the election, so again, not worried.

I am worried about, where does it end?




So now they want stronger background checks..Where will the funds come from for this? NICS is already a mess, and has trouble keeping up on busy days as it is..Make it even more intrusive, we're borderline stopping people from buying any firearm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
one of the cities with the highest crime rate...chicago...
one of the cities with the most strict gun law...chicago...

i guess that means nothing to anybody though. also im at work but ill try to find some more stats that have proven that gun crimes have gone down and most gun crimes are committed with handguns

with all that being said people say assault weapons shouldnt be allowed and there is no point to have them. Well then why do we have cars that go faster than the speed limit? Lets just have cars that dont go faster than the speed limit. BUT that wont happen because the government wants all the money that they can get from speeding tickets.

This ban would be stupid and as nova and i talked about last night, it doesnt seem as though obama wants to do anything with this. He is beating around the bush much like he did with immigration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've found as the time has gone on, and it sounds like you agree, Obama is scared. Of both the left, and the right, everything except Obamacare has shown to be one large gray area for him.

As your analogy with the cars, I made the same to a guy with a sport bike that said he doesn't see a reason to have a 50 round drum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, the few people I've talked to in person say it's not the same thing. . cars vs guns YET you hear people say all the time the faster you go, the more damage will be done, the higher the risk for death in an accident, etc, etc. . . So why not put limits on all cars/trucks?

It also seems as though their "assault weapon ban" that they want is for "rapid fire weapons" So based on their "rapid fire weapons" the HANDGUN in this video should be banned.

http://youtu.be/7DpCellB_UQ



Anyone can make a semi-automatic weapon a "rapid fire weapon" it just depends on how fast you can pull the trigger. And there's many stories coming now out about people who can re-load their weapon faster than most people would think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
studies have shown that crime goes down when u have regular citizens being able to carry firearms. how about the story of a guy going into a mall and strt shooting ppl. he stopped after two cause he saw another guy who had a carryall permit pointing a gun at him. so he shot himself. the only reason the other didnt shoot is, their were alot fo ppl behind the shooter and he was afraid to hit them. but the gunman saw this dude pointing a gun at him

also why do u think ppl go into schools shooting. they KNOW no one had a gun there to shoot back with

i will leave u with a vid that someone posted on fb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-oNMHNrS-8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I laugh at this kinda stuff. stricter gun laws don't stop these shooters, if they want to get a gun and shoot people, its going to happen. Whether it is a hand gun or an assault rifle dos not matter to them, they will procure the weapon and carry it out.

edit
It has been said time and time again, if they outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Edited by Loiter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VA is a right to carry state. I have military, armed security, law enforcment backgrounds. Im not required to take the class most people have to take here. I can simply fill out to application and will be approved to conceal carry. I don't Because in VA if you have a cconceal permit you HAVE to conceal carry, otherwise its brandishing (stupid law) I don't do it because no one is gonna try to rob the big guy with a 5" Colt 1911 Govt. Model sitting out there in the open in plain sight. People don't pull weapons on other people who WILL shoot back. I'm all for teachers carrying guns AFTER being PROPERLY Trained. IMO everyone needs a gun and be trained in its proper handling. Alot less crime and alot less loss of life if someone does try to shoot up a place.

One Lunatic with a weapon shooting into a crowd of unarmed people = alot of dead/wounded
One Lunatic with a weapon shooting into a crowd of armed people = One dead lunatic

Its not rocket science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oh and...

The whole reload time thing...yeah it's bullshit because I can place 60 rounds of 5.56mm from an AR into 6 half man sized targets spread out on 6 10 round magazines in less than 30 seconds. And have 100% round accountability (all rounds within 6" of center mass) from 25 meters (27 yards). I will tell you first and...Magazine size means less than 1 second (timed shot, reload, shot time of .735 seconds with an AR even less for pistol) action of fire means nothing, distance has little to do with anything.

If I want to reach out and touch someone or even a large group of people...It can happen reguardless if im shooting a six gun, a AR, or a bolt action rifle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='frekillz' timestamp='1356214321' post='60987']
studies have shown that crime goes down when u have regular citizens being able to carry firearms. how about the story of a guy going into a mall and strt shooting ppl. he stopped after two cause he saw another guy who had a carryall permit pointing a gun at him. so he shot himself. the only reason the other didnt shoot is, their were alot fo ppl behind the shooter and he was afraid to hit them. but the gunman saw this dude pointing a gun at him

also why do u think ppl go into schools shooting. they KNOW no one had a gun there to shoot back with

i will leave u with a vid that someone posted on fb
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-oNMHNrS-8[/media]
[/quote]

And you can see the same survivor years later here recently on cnn:

http://youtu.be/pwadYRL_vVg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hmmmm I think I'm going to make a video with a few friends showing off some proficiency with bolt action rifles, revolvers, SA pistols, non AR style rifles, and ar style rifles. Seeing as how people seem to think magazine size and action makes a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that's the kind of thought that doesn't belong in this country. Our Bill of Rights was designed with the thought in mind that if it should become necessary the people should have the power to be able to oust the standing government and form a new one. This was provided to prevent future generations from having to do what they did; leave their native land to establish their own freedoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It belongs every bit as any other thought. The fact is, they can take guns away and people will go on living. They can let people keep their guns and people will go on living. Do you really think a bunch of ragtag nobodies is going to overthrow the government? Sorry, but no. It's not going to happen.

And you can argue that magazine size and function matter/don't matter all you want. You can take all the preventative measures to make sure a Newtown or Columbine doesn't happen again. But you know what? Unless people are dropped into concentration camps and not allowed anything of their own, you're not going to stop it from happening somewhere, sometime regardless of the law. And I can guarantee that someting like this WILL happen again, not that I support it or want it to happen, but it is GOING to happen. Mainly because I don't believe it comes down to the guns, but that's an argument for another time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't care either way TBH. I have had enough with guns (and I work for Federal Ammo now...LOL) BUT to each his own and I respect that. I also believe they where looking for an excuse and using this as an excuse to get the single minded knee jerk reaction from Americans to support it.

Random people with guns scare me, random people pointing guns at people doesn't scare me. Statistic from WW2 was LESS then 40% of shots fired where aimed. With better training it is around 60% area now.

I blame it on shitty video games.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Hoole' timestamp='1356255929' post='61050']
that's the kind of thought that doesn't belong in this country. Our Bill of Rights was designed with the thought in mind that if it should become necessary the people should have the power to be able to oust the standing government and form a new one. This was provided to prevent future generations from having to do what they did; leave their native land to establish their own freedoms.
[/quote]

I would argue that is the kind of thought that belongs, Freedom is freedom to think and act how we want as long as it doesn't HURT anyone (not feelings...) and true Americans will agree to disagree and move forward.

And America was originally colonized by the Spanish and French. When England came around to coming over, it was Companies that hired/asked people to come so the companies could make money with Timber and trade in 1664. Georgia was colonized by overflow prisoners just to put them somewhere (along with Australia later). Revolutionary war started in 1774 OVER A HUNDRED YEARS LATER. America was colonized for greed. Greed said quit paying tax and govern ourselves.

Don't fall for the hype dudes! Money, greed, and the rich manipulate the rest of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, the ban won't solve anything. If nothing else only make it worse. Take for instance Weed. In the states that weed isn't decriminalized, it's sold on the street by dealers. In CO, CA, and WA it's sold in dispensaries, where it's inventoried and taxed. Eliminating the dealer on the street because you no longer have to find an illegal means of obtaining it.

AR's will be the same way as weed, but with a far worse outcome. The guys that will smuggle AR's don't have to abide by the ATF's laws currently in place. They'll be smuggling in Fully Auto Uzi's, Ak's, RPK's. Pretty much whatever is dirt cheap from a third world nation that can sneak them into the US, to be sold for high or low. Because, as the laws of supply and demand have it no matter what sector it is, one sector (illegal or legal, private or commercial) will capitalize on a market where demand is high.

 

Not only do the sheer idiotic beliefs of preventing future massacres behind this diabolical extremist liberal scheme get under my skin and chaff my ass. But, Seeing the President try to do this with an Executive Order and infringing on my rights to bear arms, this all seems to be the start of a huge conspiracy to alleviate us, the US Citizens for our guns. And for what purpose?

 

As far as capping the mags at 10 goes. That's wouldn't phase me in the least if I had to put mass lead down range. I use primarily 10 rounders in AR-15's anyways. Reason being that even though i have to reload more than the person on the other end of my barrel. I can guarantee that person will be firing full auto, in hopes of keeping my head down and will put 4 mags through it as quick as possible and pop his barrel. Since my barrel isn't as thick as a mil-spec seeing i don't fire full auto, i let it cool down between mags. Plus, when you're accurate you don't need a 30 round clip to make a difference.

 

Politicians today, I'll tell you what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of "gun deaths", in fact the majority of "gun deaths" come from suicides. The rest of the figure is filled with drug/alcohol related shootings and filled out by general homicides. There are 9-10,000 suicides by gun a year. A reasonable person could devise that the majority of gun deaths are perpetuated by the failed war on drugs. The largest criminal element that possesses guns, drug dealers and gang members, can have their funding and the majority of their power removed through the legalization of all drugs. If we treated them like a disease instead of a crime we could begin to solve the real problem instead of warehousing people, labeling them as a felon (or at best a misdemeanor drug user).

 

Assault rifles are a scapegoat for politicians to appear to be doing something, anything, about "guns". The legislation and restrictions on guns are largely a politicial issue. As someone else said, you can cap the magazine capacity on all weapons and someone can still commit gross and unusual crimes with a firearm. I saw a really funny picture where someone had 8 rounds lined up with 7 rounds lined up next to it. It said that, according to New York's recently and very poorly passed legislation, one is a lot safer than the other.

 

Just don't allow yourself to be labeled and associated with mad and maniacal men and women who commit these crimes. Don't let people control the conversation and lump all gun owners into the same group and gun control legislation will never gain traction.

 

The stats on "aiming" in wartime are irrelevant (IMO), by the way. You shoot to make the threat disappear. If that takes 100 rounds of .50BMG, 10 rounds of 5.56 or a can of 40MM grenades, it doesn't matter. Aim, don't aim, you shoot at them until they die or they disappear. Reality is not well-contained within statistics and never fits in a nice, neat package.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're absolutely right on the suicide rate a counting for the majority of gun death's statistics. It's to bad the media doesn't bring that fact to light when mention statistics that make guns and their owners look bad. 

But, it's not all politicians that want gun's to be well regulated and out of the populaces hands... It's a liberal ideal, it's like the DJ Johnny Dare on the radio said here in KC, "Nothing sells guns, better then a liberal taking office." Lol He may not be the brightest man i know. But, that is true for sure. Conservatives have never infringed upon the right to own any kind of fire arms. Other than during the Regan term. But, all be it his reason was because the president of the united states was almost assassinated and there was no background checks or wait time when you went to buy a weapon. It was a walk in and walk out type of deal. He just added the wait on buying weapons, i don't remember how long ago it was. But, the last assault ban was back when clinton took office, that i do know with certainty. 

As far as accuracy and aiming are concerned. if your a rifleman and SDM, you only have 6 mags for your weapon on you and when your hoofing it 15-20 clicks away from the FOB or if you're out on Recon op 100 clicks out being air dropped in with what you could carry on your back. Being conservative and placing your shots becomes the utmost importance. Plus, just because you kill the ones that are attacking or make them run, doesn't mean they won't come back 3 hours later and hit you again with fresh men. Realisticly, speaking 6 mags for an M4 even being well placed or short controlled burst's for light surpression to cover for your machine gunner to reload a new box onto his gun, you may make them last 4 hours worth of semi-intense fire fights. Once you're out, you're out, the gunner can't drop ammo box's out of no where for you. If he could, i'd have bought him a few more rounds than i did lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2nd Amendment was for 2 reasons.

1. A well armed militia to be called up for defense on short notice against the country's enemies.

2. To ensure that the government would never be able to mercilessly dictate over the Citizenry of this country.

Remember this is suppose to be a government by the people for the people.

Disarming the citizens is always shown to be for the overall good but still always empowers the criminals and politicians.

No Criminal wants to be shot and no Politician wants to be told NO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, six loaded mags and two for the pistol. Familiar drill. Maybe you carry some ammo for the machine gunner too. Assuming that you won't have gunships buzzing overhead and a QRF on the way--conserve your ammo. I was never out on a recon op, because I wasn't part of a reconnaissance community, but even then shooting would be generally ill-advised at best. The smaller the element you're in the less and less you want people to know where you are. Typically this wasn't an issue with what I did, lol.

 

P.S., looking at these forums gives me a weird sensation--I look away and I still see it. It must be the white on black color scheme?

 

I don't play politics too well. That's another thread though =).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Administration, never one to "let a crisis go to waste" is simply seizing on a moment to enlarge its power at the expense of the citizenry.  That's really all there is to it, says the cynic in me.  On the other hand, a part of me wants to believe that this coordinated attack on our 2nd Amendment freedoms is the result of a misguided attempt to do good in the aftermath of a heinous crime perpetrated by a madman.  After all, our representatives must be perceived as doing something to protect us from tragedies like this from happening again.  I understand that.

 

However, as Americans, we must never forget that any government, no matter how well intentioned, will always seek to enlarge its power, and thus its control, over the citizenry in order to protect what it believes to be the common good.  This is the reason our Founding Fathers designed our Constitution and our government the way they did, to ensure that our basic freedoms are protected from ourselves, and also to ensure that any changes to the law or our Constitution that encroaches on our freedoms are very difficult to enact.  Were these "brakes" (checks and balances) not applied to our government, we would find ourselves at the whim of a tyrannical regime within a generation or two.

 

Debate is good, as are arguments and disagreements.  The time it takes to effect changes to our fundamental freedoms is also smart design... it keeps us from running away with ourselves and it provides a reasonable "cooling off" period so that decisions are made consistently and rationally, after thoughtful consideration.

 

My hope is that once the outrage and urgency once again become manageable, our government will arrive at solutions that truly protect citizens, make things more difficult and costly for criminals, and do not encroach on existing individual freedoms and the right of citizens to arm and protect themselves from criminals and mad men.

 

What form will these solutions take?  Your guess is as good as mine, but knee-jerk silly things like limiting magazine size and other "feel-good" nonsense that inconvenience law-abiding citizens while leaving the capabilities of evildoers undiminished won't make us any safer... which is really what this is all about.

 

war

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know. Gun control laws. No gun control laws. Second amendment or no second amendment. I think everyone is missing the point. People get shot. Bad things happen. More so here then elsewhere with stricter gun laws. But. I think we're missing a huge point here. Why is the government really trying to take guns? As our socialist president steamrolls this country into the ground. I'm actually worried about them taking our guns away. Assault rifles, Bolt action, Shotguns, Pistols. I don't care what types.  But the American People have the right to bear arms to protect themselves. Even from their own government. And with the direction this country is going. With the government and president we currently have. I'm motivated to not only fight for my gun rights. But go out and purchase some serious hardware. Because I don't worry about home invasions, I don't worry about crime or criminals coming after me. I'm worried I'll need to defend my family from my own government. The signing of the NDAA, Obama's re-election. His hardcore views of tossing out the second amendment. His willingness to drive our economy into the ground. You want to take my guns? Show me a government I can trust to look after my family and countrymen with out taking our rights and that will do right by the people. And I'll hand over my guns. Until then. The socialists can blow me before I hand over a god damn pellet gun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know. Gun control laws. No gun control laws. Second amendment or no second amendment. I think everyone is missing the point. People get shot. Bad things happen. More so here then elsewhere with stricter gun laws. But. I think we're missing a huge point here. Why is the government really trying to take guns? As our socialist president steamrolls this country into the ground. I'm actually worried about them taking our guns away. Assault rifles, Bolt action, Shotguns, Pistols. I don't care what types.  But the American People have the right to bear arms to protect themselves. Even from their own government. And with the direction this country is going. With the government and president we currently have. I'm motivated to not only fight for my gun rights. But go out and purchase some serious hardware. Because I don't worry about home invasions, I don't worry about crime or criminals coming after me. I'm worried I'll need to defend my family from my own government. The signing of the NDAA, Obama's re-election. His hardcore views of tossing out the second amendment. His willingness to drive our economy into the ground. You want to take my guns? Show me a government I can trust to look after my family and countrymen with out taking our rights and that will do right by the people. And I'll hand over my guns. Until then. The socialists can blow me before I hand over a god damn pellet gun. 

 

I respectfully disagree with your comment, "...more so here than elsewhere with stricter gun laws."  What do you base that assessment on?  Many nations have far stricter gun laws than the U.S. and have armed violence rates that far surpass ours.  Your comment seems to make the point that stricter gun laws correlate directly to reduced rates of armed violence.  A casual survey of both cities in the U.S. and many foreign nations indicates that this is not the case.  Here is a quick reference to a chart in wikipedia that shows the U.S. in the #10 slot with respect to firearm related deaths.  Look at the nations in which gun-related deaths are higher.  It is hard to imagine living under a more restrictive government than those listed above the U.S.  Imagine what their gun control laws are like and the state of their justice systems.

 

More interesting, is the chart shown on page 9 of this 2012 Congressional Research Service report.  Murder rates by firearms are about half of what they were during President Clinton's first term... HALF!!!  That shows that current gun control laws work and are effective... it is hard to argue with the trend in overall gun violence shown on pages 9 and 10.

 

The real problem here, the one that the media doesn't want to talk about, is the long-term effect of psychotropic drugs on the young people that commit these atrocities and the lack of surveillance on them.  In nearly every instance, the people involved in these shootings were or at some point were prescribed psychotropic drugs.  The effects of these drugs-gone-wrong seem to be magnified in teenagers and young adults.

 

Not trying to bash or anything, but I'm just challenging the assumption that stricter laws = lower gun violence.  The evidence shows that isn't the case... either within the U.S. or anywhere else in the world.  No government has found a way to beat the crazy people... not even Norway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I respectfully disagree with your comment, "...more so here than elsewhere with stricter gun laws."  What do you base that assessment on?  Many nations have far stricter gun laws than the U.S. and have armed violence rates that far surpass ours.  Your comment seems to make the point that stricter gun laws correlate directly to reduced rates of armed violence.  A casual survey of both cities in the U.S. and many foreign nations indicates that this is not the case.  Here is a quick reference to a chart in wikipedia that shows the U.S. in the #10 slot with respect to firearm related deaths.  Look at the nations in which gun-related deaths are higher.  It is hard to imagine living under a more restrictive government than those listed above the U.S.  Imagine what their gun control laws are like and the state of their justice systems.

 

More interesting, is the chart shown on page 9 of this 2012 Congressional Research Service report.  Murder rates by firearms are about half of what they were during President Clinton's first term... HALF!!!  That shows that current gun control laws work and are effective... it is hard to argue with the trend in overall gun violence shown on pages 9 and 10.

 

The real problem here, the one that the media doesn't want to talk about, is the long-term effect of psychotropic drugs on the young people that commit these atrocities and the lack of surveillance on them.  In nearly every instance, the people involved in these shootings were or at some point were prescribed psychotropic drugs.  The effects of these drugs-gone-wrong seem to be magnified in teenagers and young adults.

 

Not trying to bash or anything, but I'm just challenging the assumption that stricter laws = lower gun violence.  The evidence shows that isn't the case... either within the U.S. or anywhere else in the world.  No government has found a way to beat the crazy people... not even Norway.

 

 

 

Errrr. You may have missed my point completely. I was more summing up that Americans need to keep their guns because most likely we'll be rebelling to re-earn our constitutional rights that Obama is currently attempting to burn through so quickly. I support strict gun control laws. Just with the current state of our government. Not at this time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Errrr. You may have missed my point completely. I was more summing up that Americans need to keep their guns because most likely we'll be rebelling to re-earn our constitutional rights that Obama is currently attempting to burn through so quickly. I support strict gun control laws. Just with the current state of our government. Not at this time. 

 

Sorry about that.  You are on point about the reason we have a 2nd Amendment, and why it is important that we protect it.  What really aggravates me is the way that gun control advocates seem to justify their position b/c you don't need an assault rifle for duck hunting.  I really don't get the linkage between sport shooting (not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution) and self defense.  Whatever.  I'm for being able to have any small arm a person deems necessary to defend themselves, their homes, and their families from people who would hurt them... even the Government if it comes to that (which I doubt it will).

 

------------------------

 

My rant continues...  :D 

 

About those who say, "What are you going to do, take on the Army?"  I would invite them to consider this... Everyone, everywhere has a family or loved ones.  Everyone is from somewhere and military people are no different.  That makes me believe that any commander (and I know quite a few) would do his/her utmost to ensure that any order carried out against any civilian (especially ours) would be in strict compliance with the law.  I think we have little to fear from the military because they are us... our friends, our neighbors, and our families.  They are not mindless robots parachuted in from another planet, as some would like to believe.  At no time in our history has any serviceman or woman taken an oath to defend a President.  We take an oath to support and defend our Constitution.  We swear we will obey the orders of the President and the officers appointed over us, but only so long as they conform to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  In other words, to be obeyed, orders must be lawful.  For now, I'm not really worried about what the military may or may not do, so long as it is under lawful authority.  Also, many State and local authorities have stated publicly that they will not enforce any laws they deem unconstitutional.  For now, I think we're okay unless something changes drastically.

 

The important thing is that the President's powers are pretty limited in this regard, and State and local authorities seem reluctant to enforce Federal laws they deem unconstitutional.  The President, through his executive powers, can only tighten existing regulations within the limit of the law... he cannot make law or exceed his constitutional authority, no matter how much he would like to.

 

For now, my view on the current raging gun control issue is that, "this too shall pass."

 

war

Edited by =ADK= warspite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

99.8% against it. being someone who owns several assualt rifles (2 ar-15, 1 ar-10 and 2 ak47's). the one thing i do not agree with is why would someone need a 100round clip. i see people typing up paragraphs and what not but i keep mine plain and simple. you will not be taking my guns away

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

99.8% against it. being someone who owns several assualt rifles (2 ar-15, 1 ar-10 and 2 ak47's). the one thing i do not agree with is why would someone need a 100round clip. i see people typing up paragraphs and what not but i keep mine plain and simple. you will not be taking my guns away

Apparently you haven't ever used a bump fire stock and a 100 rd magazine :) Ps. I can probably run through 300 rounds faster with 30 rd. magazines than someone could with 100 rd. magazines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

This website uses cookies to provide the best experience possible. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use