The AR-15: Why it's so great...

The real question to ask is why so many people hate an AR 15. Is it because of their profound ignorance about firearms? Are they so brainwashed by the politicians and media that they equate a EBR with something evil? Is it just an easy target because it looks ugly to them?

The girl on the upper right might clean up real nice with a few glasses of wine in her. The others seem to be lost causes.




EBR = Evil Black Rifle
 
The real question to ask is why so many people hate an AR 15. Is it because of their profound ignorance about firearms? Are they so brainwashed by the politicians and media that they equate a EBR with something evil? Is it just an easy target because it looks ugly to them?

The girl on the upper right might clean up real nice with a few glasses of wine in her. The others seem to be lost causes.




EBR = Evil Black Rifle
I like the EBR. But you skipped a few. KBR: Killy black rifle. Just kind of normal AR. EKBR: Extra Killy black rifle. This one has a quad rail. SKBR: Super Killy Black Rifle. This one has a rail, and some crap mounted on it that may not serve any useful purpose, but the appendages make the rifle look super killy.
 
Where are the regulated militias that are going to protect us from tyranny?

We are right behind you, beside you, live in your neighborhood. We are the silent, conservative majority that no one on the left should ever really piss off.
 
The key to the "well regulated" phrase is very very very simple. If the phrase meant "subject to regulations," then please tell me WHY there were absolutely NONE, ZIP, NADA, ZILCH, NULL SET "regulations" of that sort passed by the federal regulatory body (Congress) which even ADDRESSED the militia for over 100 years. It was SOOOOO important that the militia be "regulated" but then they passed no "regulations" as if they forgot about how important it was? Really?

Rather the phrase has a meaning closer to "well equipped"... which, interestingly enough, matches the articles in the Federalist papers where the authors of the BOR DISCUSSED WHAT THEY MEANT. Why, imagine reading the stated intents of the author to discern what they meant. It is like - magic or something! In there (I think it is 47 or 49) it is stipulated that a member of the militia SHOULD BE OUTFITTED AS AN ORDINARY INFANTRY SOLDIER. That is, he should be "regulated" with today's equivalent of an M4 auto select fire rifle, a sig 320 handgun with large mags, and a few other items in his kit, not excluding hand grenades! THAT is the definition of "well regulated" if you actually want to pay attention to the stated intentions of the authors of the BOR.

If, OTOH, you are like the majority of leftist twits and newsie sluts, you could care less what their intent was, as the only thing important is YOUR intent, and how you think it "should" be. Again, if this is not you, then just be aware that my disgust and contempt for that blubbering gob of nonsense about "well regulated" is only tangentially directed at you, as you are just the well meaning but ignorant recipient of that silly bit of "reasoning."

We good?
There you go again...
Short shallow thoughts, small words, not much to say, yada, yada, yada.....

BTW, I don't want no stinking self detonating Sig 320
 
Hey @XYX I tried to send you a PM apologizing for posting information about you, but you’re not accepting PMs. It was a stupid thing to do and I really didn’t think anything of it until another member said that it came across as threatening, and that was not my intent. Sorry for being an idiot on the internet.
 
For 150 years at least, civilians in the US had access to superior weaponry than the military. Civilians were actively engaged to participate in assisting, using their personal weapons, in the defense (and offense) of this nation.

The thought, that men who had just called upon their own untrained, undisciplined, under armed fellow citizens to rise up and face a global empire, would suddenly change their mind and feel that their regular citizenry are the ones to be constrained by their newly formed government is a farce.

It is further a moronic thought that these men, intellectual powerhouses of their time, would be completely ignorant of the fact that technology may advance. That somehow the world would completely freeze in place.

What they further knew with absolute certainty is that power corrupts. And absolute power corrupts absolutely. So when setting up their new grand experiment in freedom every great pain was put into place to restrain the beast of a government they were waking.

Again, the 2nd was not put in place to reign in the citizenry. Like all the other portions of the Bill of Rights, it was put in place to place reins on the government.

The issue so many modern leftists have is they look at the past as if those men were somehow less intelligent than they are because they were raised a long time ago without electricity and running water. What they fail to realize is most of these men, by the age of 17, had accomplished more, seen more, and experienced more in their lives than we ever will.

I am actually quite certain if they were alive today (the same men who were pushed to war over a tea tax), would be appalled that we allow ourselves to be governed so heavily in the first place. If they saw modern weaponry and asked where they could get one and my response is “we can’t, it’s only for the government” they would respond with “That’s specifically what we didn’t want to happen! How can you resist tyranny if you start out at such a disadvantage!”

So, if you want to debate that “Maybe we don’t need a 2nd, we should remove it.” Then at least be honest. But trying to rewrite the absolute clear intent in which it was written shows ignorance.

And as mentioned above, people like you don’t show up to these conversations with any real intent to learn, debate, or even entertain the possibility of being corrected. You come here to spout self appointed higher morality so you can slink into your leftist echo chambers and declare a moral victory against us mouth breathing rednecks that are so hell bent on freedom and being left alone.
Tagged for future use. Nice written piece @B00ger. So well thought out.
 
I've got a very good grasp on it-- and individual liberty extends far beyond gun ownership. What some people don't have a good grasp of is what right is actually afforded by the Second Amendment. "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." This was not intended to be a blanket catchall for every Tom, Dick and Harry to own a gun. And I'd go so far as to say that the current state of gun ownership has expanded greatly beyond what James Madison had in mind when proposing the Amendment, which was for the creation of a civilian force that could counteract a tyrannical government. Where are the regulated militias that are going to protect us from tyranny? Probably some unregulated ones in Oregon and Idaho, but they're not securing anything except their compounds. Chief Justice Berger, a conservative, once stated that the gun lobby’s interpretation of the Second Amendment was one of the greatest pieces of fraud on the American people by special interest groups that he'd ever seen.
Can we please... pretty pretty please, finally have a 🤢 option for the "like" button.
 
I've got a very good grasp on it-- and individual liberty extends far beyond gun ownership. What some people don't have a good grasp of is what right is actually afforded by the Second Amendment. "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." This was not intended to be a blanket catchall for every Tom, Dick and Harry to own a gun. And I'd go so far as to say that the current state of gun ownership has expanded greatly beyond what James Madison had in mind when proposing the Amendment, which was for the creation of a civilian force that could counteract a tyrannical government. Where are the regulated militias that are going to protect us from tyranny? Probably some unregulated ones in Oregon and Idaho, but they're not securing anything except their compounds. Chief Justice Berger, a conservative, once stated that the gun lobby’s interpretation of the Second Amendment was one of the greatest pieces of fraud on the American people by special interest groups that he'd ever seen.
I wonder what people means. Why would the government need to give rights to itself to have an army?
 
The real question to ask is why so many people hate an AR 15. Is it because of their profound ignorance about firearms? Are they so brainwashed by the politicians and media that they equate a EBR with something evil? Is it just an easy target because it looks ugly to them?

The girl on the upper right might clean up real nice with a few glasses of wine in her. The others seem to be lost causes.




EBR = Evil Black Rifle
D. All the above. 1654116439860.gif
 
Gone until he/she gets his/hers next marching orders from everytown for gun safety and Bloomberg.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom