Sandy Hook Shooting

[Celegorm]

Defense against home intruders. Made the news in detroit recently when an ar-style rifle was used for just such a thing: CCTV captures moment Detroit mother opens fire on home invaders with rifle | Mail Online.

Now you can answer my question via PM so we don't continue to derail this thread.

 

[jarlmaster]

No. Absolutely not. One, we have police for home intruders. Or knives or fists. You don't need a gun to defend yourself in a city (Detroit I may allow given how dangerous it is). Now for the countryside I can understand because the police could take 20 minutes to get to you. But you don't need an ar to defend yourself. A shotgun or handgun will work just fine. So defense is not a reason to have an ar. Anyway I'll pm you.

 

[DogSong]

well I have many arguments, evidence, etc. to answer your question but let me ask a question in return. why does the average person need an ar? why do people need to buy a high powered, rapid firing, assault rifle? what possible, legitimate reason could a person have for wanting to buy an assault rifle? and don't give me extreme examples of where one could be useful, like defending yourself from a bear or something

I need one for coyote hunting.... If you have a coyote coming in at you at a full run, or is running away, a single shot bolt action rifle is going to get you one maybe two shots, where an AR has an unlimited amount of shots you can get off. And why does the average person need one? Because we can and because we want to defend ourselves from tyranny, which is starting to evolve in Washington DC

---------- Post added at 07:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:11 PM ----------

No. Absolutely not. One, we have police for home intruders. Or knives or fists. You don't need a gun to defend yourself in a city (Detroit I may allow given how dangerous it is). Now for the countryside I can understand because the police could take 20 minutes to get to you. But you don't need an ar to defend yourself. A shotgun or handgun will work just fine. So defense is not a reason to have an ar. Anyway I'll pm you.

Oh yeah, lets take a knife to a gun fight. Get out of here! And an AR isn't really that high powered. I have a .308 Winchester, and it triples the power that of an AR. An AR is about the equivalent of the .38 Spcl (not statistic but as far as hierarchy). The AR-15 uses a .223 or a 5.56 Nato, which neither is really that powerful. Unless you're talking about an AR-10 which uses a 7.62x51 Nato. Now, I want to hear some evidence on why you SHOULDN'T have an AR from your side, otherwise you're spewing out liberal nothingness. And stricter gun control? Hmmm.... Backround checks, has to be a certain age.... I think that's pretty freaking strict.

 

[jarlmaster]

ok I said extreme examples. An AR for coyote hunting... fine. Or you could just not hunt them but if you must, fine. Defending ourselves from tyranny? What is this? The 1700's? Please. As if the government could ever get away with anything remotely tyrannical without being deposed. And oh great! Lets just have everyone armed so more people can die. So when the 9 times out of 10 that a home invader is unarmed and the other time he has a knife (its super rare that a home invader has a gun fyi) he gets gunned down. Take guns away from BOTH sides. Make it hard to get guns. Most criminals, the vast majority of them, get guns legally. You don't have to agree with me but when all you see on tv is the next huge shooting, and you say "more guns to defend ourselves!" that just causes more violence.

 

[DogSong]

ok I said extreme examples. An AR for coyote hunting... fine. Or you could just not hunt them but if you must, fine. Defending ourselves from tyranny? What is this? The 1700's? Please. As if the government could ever get away with anything remotely tyrannical without being deposed. And oh great! Lets just have everyone armed so more people can die. So when the 9 times out of 10 that a home invader is unarmed and the other time he has a knife (its super rare that a home invader has a gun fyi) he gets gunned down. Take guns away from BOTH sides. Make it hard to get guns. Most criminals, the vast majority of them, get guns legally. You don't have to agree with me but when all you see on tv is the next huge shooting, and you say "more guns to defend ourselves!" that just causes more violence.

No it does not. And taking the guns away from both sides would be wrong, and it would be against the CONSTITUTION. Yeah, remember that thing signed in 1787? That thing? Yeah, it guarantees the right to bear arms. And government taking over and getting away with it? How about Fidel Castro in Cuba? He took all their guns away to keep them from uprising! Same story with Ferdinand Marcos in 1971? Yeah took their guns away too. Obama is steadily becoming more socialistic. And what is Communism? It's a form of Socialism! And what did Castro and Marcos have in common? They were both dictators. And what form of government to dictators come from? That's right! COMMUNISM! Oh, and I want evidence about the 9 out of 10 on home break ins, because I don't believe it.

 

[particleman]

I used to be a Detroit cop. The latest I personally was for a police run was 1 day. I got to the house asked if they called the police she said "yeah that was yesterday" By the end of midnight shift we were sometimes over 100 runs "in the hole" which means there are 100 calls waiting to be answered. And that is 1 precinct out of 13.

 

[Celegorm]

Most criminals, the vast majority of them, get guns legally.

Can you prove that? It flies against almost everything I've ever seen.

 

[DogSong]

Can you prove that? It flies against almost everything I've ever seen.

Exactly! I mean, if a criminal is gonna get a gun to go have a shootin' is he really gonna get it legally? Like heck he is

 

[Celegorm]

Exactly! I mean, if a criminal is gonna get a gun to go have a shootin' is he really gonna get it legally? Like heck he is

Yeah, I doubt all the convicted felons getting charged with "felon in possession" here in Milwaukee passed their background checks at a gun store.

 

[iPwn]

So the whole town and surrounding area is involved in a massive cover up? That seems about as fishy.

I don't believe there were dead kids at all.

The Victim(s?):
The girl that was plastered all over TV as being dead? She appeared with Obama and her "family" (also known crisis actors). They mixed up the girl who died and let the 'dead' girl appear on TV... in the very dress they showed her in when she was identified as a victim!

The School:
The shots they used on TV where they showed ambulances and people on stretchers were a full MILE away from the school, down a hill. Did they roll the people on stretchers a mile down a hill to the ambulance?

The Mother:
They said the kids mother worked at the school, then she was a substitute, then a helper... every school official said they'd never heard of her.

She was an avid shooter? Why did she leave an AR-15 unguarded with fully loaded magazines 'everywhere?' Any firearm owner will tell you that's stupid. I have a single loaded magazine for home defense, locked up with the firearm, and all other weapons' magazine are empty, ammunition elsewhere.

The Neighbor:
There was one guy who appeared on TV (also found to be a crisis actor) that said he found children on his driveway... his driveway was farther away than where the police and ambulances were staged/filmed. How did three kids run past the barrier? His timeline of events is also contradictory to the police report.

No, no... this whole story wreaks of fear mongering garbage. The shooting in CO? Let's not get into that one! I can say that a friend of mine was there, and he said there were two shooters, not just a crazy poor medical student who magically came into possession of over a half a million dollars worth of military gear (not available to the public).

This is all very much a planned timeline of events, any way you cut it. Did you know that foreign troops were traveling door to door in New Orleans after Katrina confiscating firearms? They were also being trained in the streets of Chicago to do the same. This country is being systematically bled dry and dismantled. Whether you believe it or not is up to you, but the facts are all around you.

Re: Gun Control
If all guns were outlawed, would that make criminals any less able to commit crime? No, it would make innocent people less defended.

As if the government could ever get away with anything remotely tyrannical without being deposed.

TWA 800
9/11
Iraq
.
.
This list can go on for days.