>no one is coming for your guns you stupid rednecks
>by the way here is a list of restrictions that I think should be placed on guns so that no one can own any
>also there should be 0 restrictions on abortions and birth control and they should all be paid for by the government
>>76077900
You got too many issues going on for one thread. Yes, but they took my gun after Jade Helm 15 and put me in a fema camp
>>76077900
My own opinion is, that background checks for pistols/semiautomic rifles, sports guns should stay at range you don't actually need those. Absinense is natures birthcontrol. Can't do that? Then pay up. No-one is giving men condoms on demand when that would be cheaper and disease free.
>>76078968
Shall not be infringed you sperglo Piece of shit
>>76078968
I support your right for bear arms, but if situation would be 0, and you didnt have mexican/nigger problem thats how I'd have it.>>76078968
>>76078968
>>76079195
If you can't post anything without rambling incoherently, go somewhere else.
>>76078968
works every time
>>76077900
I think everyone should be able to own as many guns as they want, except for military weaponry. I think abortion and birth control are both good things, but neither should be funded by the government, or at the very least given out for free.
>>76079864
So what you're saying is that if I write software for the military then as soon as I hand it over then I'm not allowed to have it anymore? I can't even fix or improve it?
Did you huff too much forest fire smoke?
>>76079864
Shall not be infringed
>>76079719
BILL OF NEEDS
>>76079864
The most popular rifle in America is the civilian counterpart to our service rifle.
Define 'military weaponry,' and elaborate on specifically why you think individuals do not have the right to own it.
Background check: yes
Anything else: SHALL
I will concede however, that guidance systems are not weapons and it should be illegal to attach them to weapons. That and explosive ordnance should require increased handling and safety training as well as a psych evaluation.
That is the sum of all sensible gun laws, thank you and good day.
>>76080815
Get fucked. Not a thing in the wrong with a private sale.
And I say if Hillary Clinton can launder guidance system rockets over to ISIS then let's have them as well, hey?
>>76080252
The Constitution is a living and breathing document
>>76080640
I suppose I mean like assault rifles, SWAT weaponry, and weaponry used against enemy combatants
>>76080815
>shall not be infringed
>except for these infringements I arbitrarily find alright
Background checks are a slippery slope. Everything's a mental illness, these days, and disagreeing with liberals can literally get your arrested. Not to mention, to fund a government bg check system, you have to steal money from the public to fund it.
>>76081058
Most swat weapons are the most popular weapons in America.
Also it literally says shall not be infringed
>>76081058
>assault rifles
Why?
>'swat weaponry'
What does that mean?
>'weaponry used against enemy combatants'
Knives are used. Pump-action shotguns, handguns, fucking shovels. Bolt action rifles that are built on the same action as popular hunting rifles. What logical reason would you have for saying that these guns are unfit for civilian ownership, but others are totally fine?
>>76077900
how many magazine clips can that assault machine gun carry? I'm extremely triggered right now.
>>76081212
The Constitution isn't permanent, the Founding Fathers couldn't have accounted for a weapon that could kill 50 people in less than a minute
>>76081217
I suppose I just mean assault rifles and highly destructive weaponry then, grenades, rocket launchers, etc. Anything that can kill a massive amount of people in a fraction of time should be disallowed
>>76080815
Fuck that. SHALL on all.
If someone fucks up with a gun, fuck that person up. Do not punish the many for the crimes of a few.
All background checks have done is throw a wedge into the door for future bans. They don't have to do a sweeping ban, they can just expand what prevents you from passing a background check. That's why they're going so hard on the drug-use, mental illness, and domestic """"""violence"""""" route.
>>76081399
*isn't permanently unchangeable, rather
>>76081399
lets keep it contained to guns for the moment.
What is your conceptual definition for an assault rifle?
>>76081058
>I suppose I mean like assault rifles, SWAT weaponry, and weaponry used against enemy combatants
You're a fucking imbecile.
>>76081058
>The Constitution is a living and breathing document
Actually it is not.
The Bill of Rights, which encompass the first 10 amendments to the US constitution are not in play. They cannot be altered, or changed in an way. All attempts to do so thus far have been treason.
>>76081399
>highly destructive weaponry
Define this, and then definitively state why you think those weapons are unacceptable, but others are fine. You've repeatedly dodged this question, and it's important to the discussion.
>Anything that can kill a massive amount of people in a fraction of time should be disallowed
But it's perfectly fine for governments to own it, which are made up of people? Why? Again, specifically. Not "because death maaaan"
Governments have murdered more people than nonpartisan individuals could ever hope to, and you specifically want to allow them to have WMDs, but NOT individuals?
>>76081399
That's fucking stupid logic, though.
Counting ALL firearm crime, not just fatalities, firearms still have a safety rate of 99.9% in the US. The weaponry isn't the problem, criminals are.
>>76077900
>abortions
>guns
Why not both?
>>76078968
>No-one is giving men condoms on demand
Let's fix that.
>>76079195
If you support their right to bear arms, then that's it. Unqualified. No further discussion needed. What you really mean is that you don't really support their right; instead, you just pay lip service to it.
>>76081399
>The Constitution isn't permanent, the Founding Fathers couldn't have accounted for a weapon that could kill 50 people in less than a minute
They could actually.. At the time the Bill of Rights was drafted there were fucking cannons, artillery pieces and honest to god WARSHIPS in private hands. They specifically accounted for militairy-tier weapons when they drafted the Second Amendmend... Hunting weapons were a non-issue at that point in time, as basically everybody needed those.
>Anything that can kill a massive amount of people in a fraction of time should be disallowed
Gasloline? Fertiliser? Automobiles even?
>>76081399
Yes, they could. The Puckle Gun was already in existence. Jesus Christ, you're thick.
>>76081629
This.
What's funny is that the right to keep, and bear arms was not an American invention, but a British one. All the Americans did was codify it in law as a limitation on the powers of government.
>the Founding Fathers couldn't have accounted for a weapon that could kill 50 people in less than a minute
I think we should be allowed to use whatever a marine rifleman can use. Period.
>>76081562
Yeah, that's a good point too.
Leaf, why should it be okay for the government to be the sole possessor of this type of weaponry? Are the people in the government somehow more trustworthy or accountable somehow?
http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/24/a-decade-later-remember-new-orleans-gun-confiscation-can-and-has-happened-in-america/
Don't say they're not coming for my guns when it's happened before.
>>76081399
The Founding Fathers were huge fans of the Puckle Gun and realized the potential for new and improving guns.
What you're doing is essentially calling the Founding Fathers stupid, and it's quite insulting.
>>76081663
Also: Never forget that guns had been improved upon in the lifetimes of the Founding Fathers up until that point. There were also guns in the hands of the British militias that were an invention of a Scottish-Brit which was a breech loading rifle. Not smooth-bore musket. Rifle. Unique among it's achievements was also the fact that it was one of the first rifled muskets to be capable of mounting a bayonet. There was also the Puckle Gun. Firearms advancements were being made right in front of their eyes while they wrote the damn Declaration of Independence. They knew guns would change. They didn't give a damn. The right to keep and bear arms was more important than the discomfort of future tyrants.
>>76077900
In Germany you can concealed carry if an entity in the executive says it's ok (no rights whatsoever on your part). This is just some common sense gun control, amiright?
you know we can pick out reddit shill threads pretty easy faggot. Don't worry your day will come
>>76081973
Knowing the German government, they'd give that right to Rapefugees and Turks before they gave it to native-born White Germans.
In fact, I'd wager they'd give it to the former for specifically for use against the latter.
>>76081928
>implying the founding farthers were some kind of infallible gods and their laws are set in stone
I never got this appeal to authority, what's wrong about demanding your rights on your own behalf and not because "muh founding farthers said so"?
>>76077900
>"lol obama isn't going to take away your guns you rethuglican redneck retard"
>cue obama leading the huge push for AWB, mag cap bans, and other such fuckery
>"lol obama never tried to take your guns away you rethuglican redneck retard"
some people just live in an alternate reality
>>76082075
They give it to nobody, that's the cynical joke behind my post.
>MUH SHALL
You're fucking idiots.
A little 8 year old kid can't go into a store to buy a pack of cigarettes, they can't get a gun either, they also can't drive a car, buy a beer or pay for sex. Where is the SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED outrage?
Obviously there are going to be some restrictions no matter what. It's all about where you draw the line.
When someone says they support background checks yelling SHALL is literally not an argument. You wouldn't use the same ''argument'' if someone said that someone currently in jail shouldn't be able to order a truck full of drugs to arm everyone in the jail.
>SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!! GUN FOR EVERY MAN IN JAIL!!!
I think there are gonna be more strict gun regulations but they will never full on ban guns its unconstitutional
>>76082219
>The bill of rights explicitly protects the rights of 8 year olds to buy cigarettes
>>76082219
>societies will allow children to buy cigarettes and drive ferraris unless government steps in
Shaming people for drug use and reckless behavior is the burden of culture. To say it's more moral to jail or rob a store because a 17 year old bought cigarettes is silly.
>in jail
>rights
Literally what are you talking about?
Regardless, the reason it's more important to us, culturally, is because kids smoking cigarettes don't help overthrow tyrannical governments. Civilians with guns of the same capability as the government, do.
>>76079864
why would you not wan't the government to regulate abortions and make them safer for women?
>>76082493
SHALL
>>76082529
Maybe he'd rather women take responsibility for their actions instead of forcing him to pay for them to murder their children
>>76082219
>When someone says they support background checks
we already have background checks, moron
>yelling SHALL is literally not an argument.
we already had all of the pertinent arguments back in 2013
anti-gunners don't fucking listen and never will, and we won anyway, so it's a lot easier to say "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" these days :^)
p.s. don't you have a potato to scavenge for you malnourished baltnigger?
>>76082573
So, your argument is that the Constitution limits the power of the federal government to restrict the sale of cigarettes to 8 year olds.
And you expect to be taken seriously?
>>76082806
You're literally not making any sense. Can you not read?
>>76082871
You're LITERALLY trying to equate something not protected by the Constitution with something that is.
Have you not read the Constitution?
>>76082125
>what's wrong about demanding your rights on your own behalf
Nothing. But Americans were given basically ALL modern rights by their Founding Fathers, so why would they try and reinvent the wheel?
>>76083166
We weren't really given these rights. We believe that everybody has these rights already as a consequence of being alive, and we just thought it would be a good idea to write it down somewhere.
>>76082871
>You're literally not making any sense.
No, u.
>Can you not read?
Have YOU actually read the Second Amendmend to the United States Constitution?
Protip: It doesn't say 'Lung disease being necessary for the security of free 8 year olds, the right of the children to keep and smoke cigarettes shall not be infringed'...
Since assault weapons are such a huge problem in america why don't we do this instead!
The fingerprinting smart guns are a good first step, but they still leave open a lot of room for abusive by an authorized user. I propose that guns should not only need biometric unlocks, but also that the user should need to call up 911 and have the operator remotely unlock the gun for use it they concur the user is in a legimate life threatening situation. Also, mandating cameras attached to all weapons, especially concealed carry ones, which record and transmit to a cloud storage.
Guns should also have a feature whereby they can only fire if they are pressed against the target. This will prevent mentally unstable men from killing children at long range.
Magazine limits are common sense, but also the first round loaded should be required to be a warning foam round. The foam rounds used by police forces are effective, but still require training to use safely, so the mandatory civilian foam rounds should be much less dense, and not designed to inflict pain, but to make sure an attacker 100% knows there is a gun present and give them a chance to flee- thus reducing overall gun deaths.
We should should also license free thought and speech. We can control the spread of bad ideas by putting biometric scanners on all computers, cell phones, video game consoles so that certain ideologies cant spread.
Obviously dangerous speech and ideas are easily concealed in various ways, so all information about our populace will be public record and searchable.
All people should have an override put into their voice box so that they can have their voices muted if they start saying something potentially hurtful or expressing dangerous ideas.
Help me come up with some progressive ideas that will help me target the greatest killer of this or any other century. I know with some time we can stamp out dangerous free speech and ideas.
>>76083323
I know that's the theory... But in practise, you've been given them by the Founding Fathers, and ever since then every subsequent governement has been trying to take them away from you.
>>76082526
If people in jail don't have rights then that's already an example of rights being infringed.
You can't say ''ALL PEOPLE CAN OWN GUNS!!! NO RESTRICTIONS WHATSOEVER!!'' when people in jail can't buy a gun. The shall not be infringed mantra is bullshit. Your rights are and they will be infringed.
In some cases it's even a good thing, like when someone in jail wants to buy a gun.
You idiots haven't even thought about the topic and you go ''WOAH!! WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??'' like you're braindead. You've never thought about it so someone questioning these ideas blows your mind. You can't even fathom the idea that people in jail are getting their rights infringed, and that maybe it's a good thing.
>>76083420
Fair enough. Good thing they wrote it down tho.
And like on actual parchment or whatever it was, not just typing it into a computer somewhere.
>>76083365
I wasn't talking about cigarettes, you fucking moron. It was an example. At no point I said that there was anything in the constitution even close to that.
You're braindead.
>>76083445
That's like saying it's infringing somebody's rights if you execute them for being a mass-murdering serial rapist.
If you infringe upon someone else's rights, then you give up your own.
>>76077900
Goddamn I love this country. Thank you Ronald Reagan for giving my family refugee status.
Europoors will never have this much freedom.
>>76083445
>If people in jail don't have rights then that's already an example of rights being infringed.
People in jail do have rights, anon.
>You can't say ''ALL PEOPLE CAN OWN GUNS!!! NO RESTRICTIONS WHATSOEVER!!'' when people in jail can't buy a gun.
But that isn't what American law says, and it isn't what the Second Amendmend means... If the Constitution were to be taken that literally, jail in itself would be unconsitutional as it infringes the right to travel freely..
>The shall not be infringed mantra is bullshit. Your rights are and they will be infringed.
This is a reason for you to just give it all up? Kek. Are you Homo Sovieticus?
>In some cases it's even a good thing, like when someone in jail wants to buy a gun.
Which they can't, anon. Not legally anyway.
>You idiots haven't even thought about the topic
No, u.
>You can't even fathom the idea that people in jail are getting their rights infringed, and that maybe it's a good thing.
Pretty sure we can, and we agree.. Also pretty sure that 'we the people' does not mean 'we, the criminal scum that is in prison'
>>76083615
Exactly.
Now we are getting somewhere.
Keep that thought in mind and now try to combine this idea with ''shall not be infringed'' without having cognitive dissonance.
>>76083401
>Since assault weapons are such a huge problem in america why don't we do this instead!
tl;dr
Because you started with a completely false pretext. "Assault weapons" (whatever that is, does it include knifes and bike wheels?) are and never were the problem, niggers are.
>>76083667
>refugee status
Where did you come from?
>>76081399
As usual a fucking leaf
>>76083541
>I wasn't talking about cigarettes,
You were.
>It was an example.
Not a very good one
>At no point I said that there was anything in the constitution even close to that.
Then why even bring up the 'shall not be infinged' phrase form a specific article of the Bill of Rights into a matter not covered by the bill of rights?
>You're braindead.
No, u.
>>76083667
Kek, are those repackaged and shit to be 922 compliant, or is it just rebranding?
>>76083709
That has literally nothing to do with what was being talked about before.
If you haven't initiated force, you have every right to own whatever weapons you want.
>>76083445
By committing a crime and say, killing or raping someone, certain rights are revoked because you are a danger to society.
>>76083667
>is not even allowed to say "no" when somebody orders you to bake a cake for him
>muh freedum
>>76083833
But if I initiate force are my rights to bear arms going to be infringed?
>>76083842
So their rights ARE going to be infringed?
>>76083709
>'The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed'
This is the normal situation. Nobody is arguing that there are no exceptions to the normal situation.. Why are you trying to make extraordinairy situations be the norm, or the base of legislation?
>>76083793
Family is from Lebanon
>>76081619
Because in America, it's impossible to hold opinions that fall into different sides of the "political dichotomy" at the same time. If you agree with Republicans on one issue and Democrats on another and neither one on other issues, tough shit, your voice doesn't matter. Do you hate America? Pick a side, asshole.
>>76083832
Not sure what you mean, theyre packaged in the US, but are manufactured in Romania
>>76083932
I am talking to braindead zombies like you who can't think for a second. Your head is either empty or full of shit.
You idiots can't even comprehend basic concepts or even realize that someone who is making your brain go OW OW might actually be on your side.
>>76083929
No, because you no longer have the same rights. How is this in any way hard to understand?
You can't infringe a right that someone has willfully given up. That's like saying "If I steal something, it's infringing upon my right to property if the previous owner takes it back."
>>76077900
>>no one is coming for your guns you stupid rednecks
Fact is, 99% of weapons are already illegal to privately own and its getting whittled down yearly. The only ones left you can have (depending on country, city, state, etc..) are a very feature-limited set of small arms and weapons of antiquity.
>>76081058
>muh living constitution
the left loves to shill the living constitution myth. get fucked commie, amendments can change the document, but the interpretation is not up for debate. it says what it says, which causes extreme amounts of butthurt to marxists. anyone who has purposely interpreted the constitution incorrectly is guilty of treason. supreme court justices included.
>>76083980
Doesn't matter where you're from originally (although pride in your heritage is cool), you're an American now. Fuck yeah.
>>76084110
So infringing rights isn't infringing rights because you did your mental gymnastics?
Oh, we can take guns away from someone who is ''racist''. It's not infringing, because they wilfully gave up their rights. haha. I am making arguments :DDD
>>76080088
You obviously don't know how government property rights work.
>>76084190
My whole family is voting for Trump, we love this country, but we're scarred. We dont want to live in Mexico 2.0
>>76084047
>Not sure what you mean, theyre packaged in the US, but are manufactured in Romania
Weapons and certain weapon parts manufactured outside of the US need to be either broken down into parts or modified to be 922 compliant and to count as 'manufactured in the US'... The official reason is to keep American streets safe, but in reality it's to keep your gun lobby and manufacturers happy and wealthy.
>>76084056
What the fuck are you even on about, anon?
>>76081758
>>76084348
You mean government property abuses?
>>76077900
Piss off degenerate. You are talking such a huge pile of bullshit, that I don't even know which nonsense you wrote to crush first.
Fucking liberal scum. Stupid as ever.
>>76084274
>Oh, we can take guns away from someone who is ''racist''.
You can't. Not in the US anyway...
>It's not infringing,
It is.
>because they wilfully gave up their rights. haha.
They didn't.
>I am making arguments :DDD
No, you're an odd lad...
>>76084274
Racism isn't infringing upon someone's rights. The examples I listed, are.
Good try, though, Latvian intellectual.
>>76077900
>>no one is coming for your guns
That's correct goy.
>nothing to see here
>go back to shopping
Ted Nugent was right.
>>76084484
>Weapons and certain weapon parts manufactured outside of the US need to be either broken down into parts or modified to be 922 compliant and to count as 'manufactured in the US'... The official reason is to keep American streets safe, but in reality it's to keep your gun lobby and manufacturers happy and wealthy.
Its not my fault that Colt doesn't know how to make a proper gas piston weapon.
>>76084662
Colt can't even make an up-to-par DI gun.
>>76084632
meanwhile in Israel...
>>76084733
So if they only banned ammo you would be ok with it?
>>76080815
Get killed by negros with illicit guns.
>>76083445
This is covered by the fifth amendment
>No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
>nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
Due process is required to deny rights. Passing sweeping, catch-all regulation is not due process of law.
>>76083929
>No one should go to jail because that infringes on their rights
>If you disagree, then you should give up your guns
Gun grabbers, everyone. This really is how stupid they are and how desperately they have to reach to try to make an argument against something written explicitly with no room for negotiation, and for good reason.
Yet they still try, and make fools of themselves
>>76080947
Background checks as a requirement for commercial distributors isn't bad. One needs to make sure you're supporting the rights of an actual citizen, after all.
>>76084662
>Its not my fault that Colt doesn't know how to make a proper gas piston weapon.
Good thing H&K has that down to a science.
inb4 DI can do anything GP can do
>except sniper and DMR
>>76077900
That's a beauty
>>76084818
>So if they only banned ammo you would be ok with it?
They don't put magazines in their weapons in the carry position, its IDF regulations. The magazine is usually in their pocket or strapped to the bandolier.
Thats another argument I have about open carry idiots in the USA, they put the magazine in the weapon. The cops really don't like that.
>>76084733
>meanwhile in Israel
IIRC conscripts need to carry their rifle at all times there.... But they don't get any ammo.
>>76085176
Why would you carry a gun if you can't use it for self defense?
>>76085176
>The cops really don't like that.
Shall not be infringed though..
>>76085081
>GP
>BETTER at sniper/DMR
I think you have that backwards, friendo.
Piston ARs are universally trash. If you want an AR, get an AR (which is better in literally every situation but shooting with water in the gun and full-auto suppressed shooting). If you want a piston, get a SCAR or an AK.
>>76084993
Ever been through the NICS check? It's a bit more than checking whether or not you're an actual citizen.
>>76085081
>except sniper and DMR
Not using one of a plethora of other platforms better suited for these roles.
>>76085278
So that you only have to stockpile ammo at the rally points instead of ammo and guns
>>76085176
I bed you also pump empty your car after you reach your destination so it doesn't suddently starts itself and starts running over people :^)
>>76085186
>IIRC conscripts need to carry their rifle at all times there.... But they don't get any ammo.
o rly?
>>76081399
ahem
>>76077900
IS ANYONE ELSE STILL ANGRY KING NIGGER HAD A PHOTO OP SHOOTING A DOUBLE BARREL SHOTGUN INLAID IN GOLD WHILE TELLING US WE DON'T NEED RIFLES?
HE COULD HAVE AT LEAST FOUND A FUCKING RIFLE TO SHOOT, PLENTY OF PAST AMERICAN PRESIDENTS WERE GIFTED AWESOME LEVER ACTION RIFLES.
I wonder, what does the presidential arsenal consist of?
>>76085440
Or they're not allowed to seat the mag in the rifle itself or something, I don't know. IIRC there's a reason you tend to see them without mags in their rifles...
But honestly, if they're not wearing bikini's I can't be asked to care at all.
>>76077900
Guns aren't the problem people are. No one wants to be held accountable for the actions and grow up.
>>76085589
Thats what I'm saying. Open carry should not be "ready carry". You don't put your fucking magazine in a rifle and go shopping at Costco for chrissake. It seems the Open Carry movement is run by autists.
>>76085081
Gas piston is worse for "sniper/DMR" than DGI you dunce.
Because gas piston systems have more touching the barrel and vibrating around, also more mass moving.
low pro gas block + gas tube touching the barrel with the DGI system combined with the AR-15 bolt and straight line recoil are excellent for Sniper/DMR systems.
See: SR25
Eugene Stoner continued working on the AR platform at Knights Armament Company, this is one of the results.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-25
>>76085775
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-25
Can you buy an SR-25? Nope
>>76085294
>Piston ARs are universally trash.
Stopped reading right there.
>>76085409
>Awwww
The pros I've talked to say they are moving away from bolt action and into accurized mag fed weapons.
I ain't scared.
>>76085767
>Open carry should not be "ready carry".
OC is for autists, but it'd be even dumber to openly display a gun that isn't ready to shoot. Not only is this not any safer (assuming you carry a gun in a holster that covers the trigger guard and it's drop safe, like literally every carry gun currently made), but you're making yourself a target without being prepared to respond to threats quickly. The worst of both worlds.
CC is better for everything but the woods, though.
>>76085967
>all these piston fools
What advantage are you claiming this time?
>>76085767
Open carry is just a bunch of try hard fedoras, I see no reason to not conceal and only show your weapon when you're about to shoot someone.............like why make yourself a target?
>>76085967
>mag fed
There are mag-fed bolt-actions, you drooling idiot. Regardless, DI guns are more accurate than piston guns. Period. If you choose the less accurate gun for precision work, you're a moron.
>>76085952
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/562294846
>>76085967
>The pros I've talked to say they are moving away from bolt action and into accurized mag fed weapons.
definitely, in 3-gun competitions a precision AR-15 is the go-to
>>76085952
https://www.knightarmco.com/military/?term=sr-25
Yes.
>>76085979
True dat. Concealed Carry is a nigger's worst nightmare. Open Carry is just an opportunity to get mugged and your $900 AR taken from you and you get shot with it too. Nobody ever survives a 5.56 round to the head.
>>76086142
a bolt action rifle
>>76086156
>3-gun competitions
the team leader of a large metro PD sniper unit
>>76085979
Open carrying rifles is for making a statement against all the retards who are afraid of "babby-killing salt guns". Why is it that everyone who comes with this "lol, autistic" statement is too fucking stupid get this?
Open carrying pistols is for people unwilling to get a bullshit permit just to cover a gun with your shirt.
>>76077900
Abortion should be mandatory for 99% of the population
>>76086449
I agree that you have the right to OC.
But you just admitted the intent is to further scare people who are already afraid of weapons. Please realize you are harming the perception of gun owners by normies, NOT in any way helping it.
It's exclusively for autists, which is why it's always brought up.
>>76086427
the reason is simple, there are time constraints and they can hit the target faster with a semi-auto and multiple rounds, the AR-15 design is accurate enough to do it too
I would imagine for a police sniper the first round would be the most important, but if that fails he has multiple follow-up shots.
Also the engagement distance for a police sniper is probably pretty short, making a bolt action rifle completely unnecessary.
>>76081217
300 dollar bolt action 308 hunting rifle with a good optic could do some insane damage in the right hands. Even more so than an AK or AR due to tactical advantage. Would be shit in an office building, but vs a croud or something where you can hold your range, a hunting rifle would be fucking savage.
>>76086142
>idiot
>moron
>DI guns are more accurate than piston guns.
can you show me some examples of this
cause i was in the military and carried an M-16 daily, qualified bi annually for a couple of decades
no DI marksman rifles were made and fielded except for KAC and their guns have been kinda so-so from what i read about them
i've shown you multiple pictures of GP sniper and marksman rifles that have or will be fielded militarizes on a large scale
>>76086627
Don't give the akbars any ideas. I can't imagine the happening levels if somebody were to just start picking people off out of a crowd like that.
>>76086579
I've always wondered if you open carried a blunderbuss or an arquebus, would the cops hassle you.
>>76086579
It's for making people aware of their rights and getting them used to the idea that people can carry weapons, not "lol we just want to scare people". You still can't seem to understand the idea.
There's nothing autistic about.
>>76077900
Hey remember when Obongo endorsed taking away the Constitutional rights of law-abiding United States citizens by adding them to some arbitrary list that has no oversight whatsoever?
Good times.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSEoVkl0W30
>>76086608
all this is true, from my experience and conversations
bought a pistol in February and am still waiting for the firearms control agency to approve it so I can pick it up at the gun store.
>>76086698
>Implying the US militairy fields things because they're actually the best product out there
>Implying any government weapons contract tender is ever won based on objective standards relating to how the weapon performs
Meh. Usually it's just politics...
>>76086627
>due to tactical advantage
>>76086698
You're about as smart as I expect a soldier to be.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mk_12_Special_Purpose_Rifle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Squad_Designated_Marksman_Rifle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Squad_Advanced_Marksman_Rifle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M110_Semi-Automatic_Sniper_System
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mk_14_Enhanced_Battle_Rifle
+SCAR-H and HK417, misc other nonstandard rifles.
>>76080088
lol college kids. no junior, just because you were hired to write code doesn't mean you have any rights to that code, ever. it is not your property because you wrote it. you were paid to write the software, just like a contractor is paid to paint the wall in the office.
>>76086758
You're making people want to further restrict said rights. Do you understand that?
Nobody who was on the fence about guns saw someone OCing, especially a long gun, and thought "damn, I'm glad they informed me of my rights, now I'm pro-gun!" They think "What an asshole, I hope they make that illegal."
>>76087018
Did you just call paint intellectual property?
>>76086988
Best thing the USA ever did was start buying Belgian machine guns.
>>76077900
>so that no one can own any
youll choke in straws if you suck this dick so much
>>76087146
no, i called it property of the company that paid for it, just like how they paid for a developers time.
>>76086698
>>76087008
Being a Brit, I can only look on with envy on American gun laws but from the shooting I've done both in the military and on civilian range days, aren't DI's only more accurate for follow up shots compared to a piston gun?
Is this due to reduced recoil in a DI gun?
Educate me pls burgers
>>76077900
Liberals in a nutshell.
>>76087285
Oh, OK. So it's a process of negotiations.
But it doesn't change the fact that I can't not have military weaponry from now on without having my mind erased somehow.
>>76077900
Had to get rid of my guns in NY after SAFE act got passed. I know compliance is low but I run a small business and can't risk jeapardizing my families livelihood by getting thrown into prison over my guns. I still own bolt action rifle, but it's not exactly useful for anything but hunting.
They already came for my guns here in NY.
Are Vortex optics any good?
>>76087186
>Best thing the USA ever did was start buying Belgian machine guns.
You mean the m249 and m240? It's funny how nearly every western militairy in the world was already using the Minimi and MAG, but it took the US 20 years of senate hearings and proposed modifications before they were both adopted..
It's like that everywhere I think... The Dutch police recently adopted a new pistol after about 30 (!) years of political struggle. Meanwhile Walther kept a P5 production line in order JUST for the Dutch government to buy Walther P5s (literally a post-WWII development on the P38) for twice the price of a contemporary pistol, because we STILL didn't decide on a new one yet. Even though we're surrounded by gun manufacturing countries, and we could have just bought a random 9x19mm off the shelf in Belgium, Germany, Switzerland or the Czech Republic...
>pic is Walther P5 and it's predecessor
The police didn't have the long barreled versions though.
>>76087008
Did you really list non AR platforms in a conversation about AR GP and DI ?
And those DI AR models have been pushed aside for the most part.
You're about as smart as I expect a civilian to be.
>>76087364
>Burger delivars
Good guy, cheers m80.
>>76087008
Obviously you could do more damage with a scar from range but I'm suggesting if magazine fed guns were banned because hippy's think wood stock hunting rifles are harmless. I'm not in the di vs piston discussion as that's retarded. A scar vs a croud from an office building would be 9-11 level terrorist attack.
Idgaf about what the mos is if you can put 6 down the barrel before a bolt action can reload you're going to hit something
>>76087644
Again, I know the theory. In reality almost every government since the founding fathers has been trying to pry your guns from your hands, especially recently..
>>76087762
>croud
pls stop doing this
>>76087008
>+SCAR-H and HK417, misc other nonstandard rifles.
and you know both of these are gas piston correct?
>snigger
>>76087769
I know, you're cool. Just reminded me of that pic.
>>76087865
>just now realizing this
>not mentioning the EBR
>>76087762
>if you can put 6 down the barrel before a bolt action can reload you're going to hit something
>>76087
Sorry.
Akbar's, the best terror attack is to leave bacon on white peoples porches. We're alergic to pork and will die
WHERE MY COUNTRY GONE?
>>76088041
FM scar, 120 rpm practical fire rate, 2 rounds per second vs bolt action reloading re sight.
The only problem is the scar is 5k and I need to do a couple ecos and then someone's going to call me an auto fag
>>76084390
Is that why you have so many drum mags?
>>76077900
>also there should be 0 restrictions on abortions and birth control and they should all be paid for by the government
Why shouldn't there be?
The only people getting abortions are liberals and niggers. It's self imposed eugenics.
Allowing abortion is a community service.
>>76087579
Yes. I use a Crossfire II 3-9 and it's amazing, especially for the price. Also used their red-dots before as well as their magnifiers and never had problems. They're quite popular here.
>>76083667
>foriegn ammo
>>76088346
At close range, definitely agree. But at ranges exceeding 1000 yards, precise shots from say an AWM are going to be much more effective than an HK 417 or an FN SCAR H at 120 rpm.
>>76088442
Post your arsenal so I know you ain't a liar. I see that flag.
>>76088560
They're just mags. He could be stuffing them with domestic-made 7.62x39... Though that'd be expensive.
>>76088711
That's the Vortex, I use that rifle with the irons now but I will be putting that scope on a new rifle.
>>76081449
The bill of rights can not be amended.
>>76084632
>>76082125
Because it's better than doing it the European way, where your rights are left up to the whims of whomever is in charge at that very moment.
>>76088899
Know what's funny?
7615s are vaporware in America. I want one, and have since I saw one in a magazine when I was younger.
Gun-grabbers are so short sighted...
>>76083401
>assault weapons
>>76089056
>implying it's different in the US
As for guns (just try to buy a modern machine gun) as for other basic rights (try denying baking a "wedding" cake for a gay couple).
>>76077900
actually they are in CA with the bullet button ban
>>76087997
see
>>76087639
>>76081058
>The Constitution is a living and breathing document
Yeah thats what liberals say because their batshit crazy ideas are too stupid to become an amendment, so they do what they can to get what they want
>>76087639
> implying to be military
> implying combat soldier
> calls a citizen a "civilian"
Go feast on dick gomer
>>76089069
They're only popular here because semi-autos are banned. They're fine guns but they're absurdly over-priced here.
I'd probably keep if if semi-autos are legalised though, I enjoy the pump-action a lot.
>>76079864
>military weaponry
nice meme
>>76087125
And why should we bend over for their feelies, when we are exercising a legal right?
Seems to me, a person like that isn't going to change their mind anyway.
>>76089383
>Did you really list non AR platforms in a conversation about AR GP and DI
see
>>76086698
>no DI marksman rifles were made and fielded except for KAC
>no DI marksman rifles were made and fielded except for KAC
>no DI marksman rifles were made and fielded except for KAC
>no DI marksman rifles were made and fielded except for KAC
>no DI marksman rifles were made and fielded except for KAC
You're a moron. Sorry the military stole the best years of your life.
>>76080815
>Background check: yes
Why; If someone is so dangerous they can't own a weapon why are they not in jail?
>>76089527
Nobody is suggesting you bend over. I've already stated that I do believe in the right to OC.
>Seems to me, a person like that isn't going to change their mind anyway.
Then the idea that you're 'educating people on their rights' and so forth is null, as you're now admitting. So, that being said: Why OC if you can legally CC?
Nobody's saying it should be illegal. It's just retarded.
>>76089208
It's very different. It's very difficult to take someone's rights away here. However you're just gonna argue like a faggot.
>>76086988
You are right again, but reminded me of this.
>>76089784
1911s are horribly outdated for defensive use.
>>76079864
The second ammendment isn't for duck hunting you brainwashed liberal cuck leaf, oh wait the constitution doesn't apply to you.
>>76077900
>stupid rednecks
Let them think that. I'm 5th generation Chicago, I'm a doctor, I'm pro choice. I've also been carrying a gun in the city daily since before the handgun ban came down.
Let them think we're all sitting around in Kentucky wearing overalls and smoking meth.
>>76089689
I agree with you and I don't personally OC unless I'm innawoods, but if we are going to care about the opinions of commies, we might as well just give up our guns now.
>>76089447
>Implying you're a citizen mujado.
Go build a wall faggot.
>>76089549
Colt makes AR slop rifles for decades.
>About fifteen years ago (before you were born)
>Army decides, "We need designated marksmen!".
>Army thinks, "We need designated marksman
rifles cause the Colt AR are slop!"
>Various companies submit their accurized version of the slop rifle.
>Various companies, "Let's put a scope on it and call it a DMR!"
>Army, "Welp we gotta pick something"
>Ten years later the Army doens't like what its fielded and asks for something else.
And guess what does not win?
>DIRECT IMPINGEMENT
So suck camo cucks faggots.
>>76090431
>tfw will never have an American qt
>>76089885
Indeed.
>>76077900
>rednecks with guns are crazy terrorists who want to shoot black people
>black people still exist
Hmmmm really makes you think
>>76089885
Elaborate when you make outlandish claims like this.
>>76090431
I'm a voluntarist and I judge the fuck out of people who OC.
Maybe after we hard reset and don't have the concentration of degenerate liberals that we do now, I'll feel differently.
>>76090549
Literally what rifle are you talking about? The M27? Because that's marines, not army.
Regardless, what is chosen isn't what's best. Case in point: The Beretta M9 series.
"Because we use it, it's best" is a logical fallacy.
>>76090821
>outlandish
What about it is outlandish?
1911s have great triggers and are awesome for competing, but they're horrible for defense.
>heavy
>low capacity
>manual safety (completely useless with the advent of drop-safe guns and rigid, trigger-covering holsters)
>swinging link, wears out faster than a cam
>.45, at least traditionally
>most parts require fitting
>unreliable/requires more lube
>short barreled variants are EVEN MORE unreliable
They're cool, they're fun, but they're objectively worse than modern wonderguns for defense.
>>76090549
The points you make here do nothing to answer for the foolishness you posted earlier about the list presented not counting for god knows what reason and your earlier stupidity for claiming no such list could be produced. DI is garbage in these accurized AR platforms, but it's no excuse for the crap you spewed there.
>>76090897
>Literally what rifle are you talking about?
Allow me to bring you up to speed.
http://soldiersystems.net/2016/03/31/rumor-has-it-hk-wins-csass/
>Regardless, what is chosen isn't what's best.
Previously illustrated - DI AR DMR
>>76077900
No one's coming for your reproductive rights you stupid sluts. Here's some arbitrary rules I feel should be put on your reproductive rights because I don't like them and I have no idea what I'm talking about. I also think the government should pay for my range ammo so that I can properly train to be a part of the well regulated militia. Fight me on this you literally have no argument against anything I just said. Sluts BTFO
>>76091142
Your remark about reliability is just off and the rest are reasons why you would prefer something else to it. None of those reasons listed make it bad or useless for defense, just more uncomfortable to carry.
>>76077900
Reminder.
>>76091263
generally being used by a 1st world military does say something about it's durability though
>>76088899
What am I looking at?
>>76078968
No. You don't get how having a background check can be used against otherwise sane objective people. Imagine them making "racism" a mental disorder and then barring you from firearms licenses? Fuck right off
>>76091263
My argument was never "Because they used mostly DI guns, they are best." My argument is "Because DI produces less felt recoil and greater accuracy, is lighter, has fewer moving parts, and doesn't have carrier tilt, it's best."
>>76091479
>remark about reliability is just off
I see you've never attended a pistol class.
And no, those aren't 'preference.' The 1911 is heavier: fact. Being forced to use a manual safety creates another point of failure, a more complex draw, and is slower if you fail to disengage it initially: fact.
>>76091197
If you can't accept that a direct impingement designated marksman rifle was a failure and was replaced with gas piston that's a comprehension problem on your part.
>>76091726
>a failure
Please, describe to us how DI DMRs have 'failed.'
>>76091693
> never attended a pistol class
I've put hundreds of rounds through a colt 1911 that has had hundreds of rounds put through it and haven't had a single failure to feed/fire/extract. Perfectly good handgun. I do prefer more rounds in the mag than 1911, but that doesn't make it inadequate for personal/home defense.
My favorite pistol to shoot is the beretta m9 though. I put holes where I already put them time after time.
>>76092190
Pistols ae inadequate for home defense by default because you unnecessarily trade power against handyness in any case.
>>76091726
It failing or being crap wasn't the point being argued. You claimed they didn't exist and another anon corrected you with a "short list". You got asspained and here we are now.
I'm no fan of DI. I own two rifles and neither use that system.
>>76081530
No, you're wrong, the libtards are wrong too, in saying its "alive" but you're wrong in saying that it cannot be changed, any bill of right amendment could be undone by another amendment, that's the whole point of the amendment process. It'll probably never happen, but it is legally possible. The Bill of Rights is not special or sacrosanct, they cant be edited like anything else. There is massive legal taboo against touching them, but they have no more protection than the 18th Amendment did.
>>76092343
I wouldn't necessarily say they are inadequate. I live in an apartment with thin walls and don't want to blow the head off of the baby living next door so I prefer a pistol.
>>76091849
huge failure right here :
H&K confirms: This is the Army's new and improved sniper rifle
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2016/04/08/hk-confirms-armys-new-and-improved-sniper-rifle/82788202/
>>76082219
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, *the right of the people to keep and bear arms **shall not be infringed***."
Emphasis Added.
>>76093225
Your handgun is there so you can fight your way to your rifle.
As a guy who truly hates Americans as the fat, subhuman degenerates they are.
One of the few things that they got right is the second amendment. Even the most uncucked state has too much control and restrictions on guns nowadays though, fully automatic, silencers, sbr and sbs should all be legal without any tax, permission or restriction, there should be federal stand your ground laws and gun free zones should be illegal with very few exceptions.
>>76091558
A pump action mag fed .223 long rifle made to provide almost semi-auto firepower while not being banned in countries where the right of the people to keep and bear arms CAN TOTALLY BE INFRINGED.
>>76093225
>implying a handgun round doesn't penetrate walls
Anyways at least in Austria it is not allowed to shoot people for the bants but only if it is an adequate way to save your own life from an violent attacker. Considering this shooting my neighbors by accident would be a real tragedy but not my most important concern.
>>76093590
Most of that list is DI AR platform rifles. It is not "putting words in your mouth" to show you where and why you were wrong.
You were wrong and I don't expect you to admit it here nor do I care.
Can I at least own a fetish rifle?
>>76093565
Holy shit, I just woke up. I don't need this now.
>>76094062
Why obsess over the mosin? I'll never understand /k/'s fetish for it. Why not the Mauser 98?
>>76094281
It's true, though. You can't refute it.
>>76093565
>it has a clip 55-100 bullets in each
hnnnnngggggg
>each soldier has atleast 8 to 10 clips on them at all times
HNNNNGGGGGG
>it has a grip for your hand
TRIGGERED
>>76093225
Handgun calibers have been repeatedly demonstrated to penetrate walls more readily that smallbore rifles IE .233 and its cousins.
SWAT teams specifically stopped using submachine guns and switch to the M4 Carbine family because the .223 penetrates body armor more reliably but over-penetrates walls and flesh less, due to reduced mass and less structural integrity of the bullet.
Big fat bullets are not as fast, so they don't penetrate the first barrier as well as little fast bullets, but they retain mass and energy better so they tend to keep going when they hit stuff. 55grain 5.56 rifle rounds tend to deflect or break up and lose velocity quickly after the first thing they hit. 9mm on the other hand will go right through that wall and retain enough energy on the other side to kill.
Of course the real answer to not shooting neighbor babby is to use a shotgun loaded with bird or small buckshot.
>>76092371
>You claimed they didn't exist and another anon corrected you with a "short list".
Wow, I sure did. Thank you so much for repeatedly calling me out on that!!
>Jesus, Allah and Krishna forgive me.
That was a flawed 'short list' with DMRs of several types not just DI AR. Which were not pertinent to the discussion.
>>76094300
4chan is full of poorfags.
A Mosin is waaaay cheaper than a Mauser 98(and way shittier).
>>76088899
What's a 100 yard group in look like with that thing? And can't you own lever guns in straya?
>>76094300
People think it is a great sniper rifle because it looks like a M/28.
>>76077900
Nice b8 faggot
>>76094300
Its cheap and can take down any large game in North America
memes aside i will never not be butthurt over the fact that we had legal machineguns and our retarded gov took them away
you got similarly hit ameribros but at least you can jump through hoops to get them
>>76094501
Why'd you delete your previous post?
> flawed
Whatever makes you comfortable in your failure
>>76094747
Thanks Swed bro, you could always try to make a bumpfire stock
>>76094747
Where did you go wrong, Sweden. It's really hard to see the first of the first world countries becoming sub saharan Africa.
>>76094954
socialism is a hell of a drug, man.
>>76094492
WTF AM I READING?
Even lead core bullets in .223 penetrate drywall better than 9mm. 9mm struggles to get through 1/2" drywall and certainly isn't getting through studs. .223 will fuck over anything on the other side of dry wall even up to at least 3/4". It's like shooting through paper.
