A Complete Waste of Space

Here's a stupid question answered by responsible hunters. Also, please take note of post #14. Is this the proof you were looking for, or do you need a notarized sworn statement?

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/sho ... p?t=675580

gawd, you folks are relentlessly stupid. The matter isn't whether an AR-15 is suitable for hunting. Hell, hunting is not even the point of the 2nd amendment, it is WHETHER AN AR-15 type is NECESSARY for SELFDEFENSE. Get it? Likely not, if you haven't caught on by this point.

I am thinking "stupid and not getting it" falls onto you. The banning of any firearm is the issue! I could care less if you and your type think it is "NECESSARY"!! Once we let you get your foot in the door when will it stop? That is the issue!!!

Ah...I suppose your life experience, Slick, "dictates" it ain't necessary?
The good news Slick?
It's not required of you to have one, especially since you can't handle a silly millimeter....or a tough crowd.

Darkhorse wrote:I am thinking "stupid and not getting it" falls onto you. The banning of any firearm is the issue! I could care less if you and your type think it is "NECESSARY"!! Once we let you get your foot in the door when will it stop? That is the issue!!!

so, you have a problem with the current restrictions on machine guns, grenade launchers and bazookas? No different.

Howdy DH...
Slick's never been on the receiving end of deadly force.
The tell of that is his opinion here.

Anybody who has ever been on that shit end of the stick?
Could all tell ya this?
What ever you got to defend yourself?
Ain't enough...and if they could at that moment,
get something better and bigger?
They'd give a testicle to have it, right then.

Arm chair commando's have never understood that....
Though they're eager to tell ya all about it....after a few beers.

callmeslick wrote:

Darkhorse wrote:I am thinking "stupid and not getting it" falls onto you. The banning of any firearm is the issue! I could care less if you and your type think it is "NECESSARY"!! Once we let you get your foot in the door when will it stop? That is the issue!!!

so, you have a problem with the current restrictions on machine guns, grenade launchers and bazookas? No different.

I agree with ya Slick...we need a bunch of that too.
Lets ease up the Class III and IV and V restrictions...it's unfair to
everybody. Let's see who can be the first to own a bazooka on their block...

Pudfark wrote:Howdy DH...
Slick's never been on the receiving end of deadly force.
The tell of that is his opinion here.

actually, you are wrong. Got lucky, the guy missed(says something for aim, I'm a big target)


Still, the experience didn't make me run out and buy a bigger gun.....just sharpened the wits a bit. Hmmm, come to think of it, perhaps a gun is a better choice for some of you.

callmeslick wrote:gawd, you folks are relentlessly stupid. The matter isn't whether an AR-15 is suitable for hunting. Hell, hunting is not even the point of the 2nd amendment, it is WHETHER AN AR-15 type is NECESSARY for SELFDEFENSE. Get it? Likely not, if you haven't caught on by this point.

Good grief! Did you bother to read the post I pointed out?


Let me ask you a simple question. Are all guns sold suppose to be for personal defense? Is that all they're good for? Personally, that was the last reason I ever bought a gun for.

no, Buzz, but if the discussion is triggered by Gun Control Legislation, we are talking SOLELY about limitations of the 2nd Amendment, and that has no bearing on hunting. And, as I tried to point out before, Buzz, a ban on AR15 types would be intended to lessen availability to get into the hands of loons who murder others. Hunting or recreational use is all well and good, but neither trumps the 'General Welfare' of the nation. That last part in in the Constitution.