User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 8:17:01 PM EDT
[#1]
In for a penny, in for a pound.
Shouldn't be allowed to choose when you want to be equal and when you'd rather not be. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 8:21:02 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
agreed. you volunteered. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I said yes, but you know they'll just get preggers before they ever have to go into harm's way. Depo shots should be mandatory for active duty female soldiers. agreed. you volunteered. So are we eliminating all Catholics, or just catholic women? What about those that have had medical issues with hormonal birth control? Are you going to give tape waivers when the depo shot causes them to gain weight? Incidentally, this thread is about a draft, which means that the women may not have volunteered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 8:28:19 PM EDT
[#3]
Judge Robert Bork was a prophet.
*Slouching towards Gomorrah. As for me I'm glad I'm old-I no longer recognize or even like much of this country. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 8:28:23 PM EDT
[#4]
Yes. Equal rights and all that........
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 8:32:31 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There really isn't a perfect solution. Either UCMJ or deployment anyway, but even those aren't ideal. Then again, if drafted, you are mandating women give over some of the very limited number of reproductive years they have in service to their country while prohibiting them from reproducing, without placing a similar prohibition on the men. As it stands right now, UCMJ if a pregnancy occurs in the lead up to a deployment during an initial enlistment. There's no perfect solution because somebody is always going to come up with 1,000 "what if'" situations. It's a real issue that military units faced in the last two conflicts with volunteers. It would be even worse with conscripts. I understand not all women can take hormonal birth control and my first reply was poorly thought out. There are however other methods such as IUDs and various barrier methods available. Honestly the obvious solution is to abolish selective service all together and then nobody has to register. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 8:48:17 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So are we eliminating all Catholics, or just catholic women? What about those that have had medical issues with hormonal birth control? Are you going to give tape waivers when the depo shot causes them to gain weight? Incidentally, this thread is about a draft, which means that the women may not have volunteered. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I said yes, but you know they'll just get preggers before they ever have to go into harm's way. Depo shots should be mandatory for active duty female soldiers. agreed. you volunteered. So are we eliminating all Catholics, or just catholic women? What about those that have had medical issues with hormonal birth control? Are you going to give tape waivers when the depo shot causes them to gain weight? Incidentally, this thread is about a draft, which means that the women may not have volunteered. If your religious views conflict with the terms of military service then you should not enlist. I feel the same way about religions that require men to engage in practices that require deviation from military regulation such as shaving. Certain exceptions have always been made when a draft is required. Non combat domestic roles can be substituted as needed in that case. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:01:47 PM EDT
[#7]
If women think they are capable of being the equal of men , especially in the Infantry or the other combat arms, then by all means they should register for the draft and ruck up. You asked for it, you got it. Real life is not a video game.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:06:13 PM EDT
[#8]
yep.
No special rights for all, just equal rights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:06:46 PM EDT
[#9]
I support equal rights for women. One hundred percent. No if's, and's or but's.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:07:31 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Equal rights is what they want, Then equal rights is what they shall get.  Someone has to take care of the kids, and I don't want my wife signing up. Call me old fashioned. However, I would ask every femnazi where their selective service card is, you know, if they believe in equality and all that. *i swear that was an auto correct 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:12:30 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh, that's an easy fix. Mandatory birth control. Getting knocked up would be an Article 15 offense. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I said yes, but you know they'll just get preggers before they ever have to go into harm's way. Oh, that's an easy fix. Mandatory birth control. Getting knocked up would be an Article 15 offense. Absolutely. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:12:31 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So are we eliminating all Catholics, or just catholic women? What about those that have had medical issues with hormonal birth control? Are you going to give tape waivers when the depo shot causes them to gain weight? Incidentally, this thread is about a draft, which means that the women may not have volunteered. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I said yes, but you know they'll just get preggers before they ever have to go into harm's way. Depo shots should be mandatory for active duty female soldiers. agreed. you volunteered. So are we eliminating all Catholics, or just catholic women? What about those that have had medical issues with hormonal birth control? Are you going to give tape waivers when the depo shot causes them to gain weight? Incidentally, this thread is about a draft, which means that the women may not have volunteered. We are going to have to deal with the pregnancy issue at some point, though. Mandating birth control is probably a non-starter, but the DoD is going to need to end up working some policy that holds women responsible for their reproductive choices. Bad paper for pregnancy while in a deployable unit, perhaps. First enlistment pregnancy needs to go away - it's a bad deal for the armed services. A woman who makes the military a career? Sure, some sort of system to request a non-deploying set of orders. Accidents happen? Sure. We give commanders a lot of discretion as it is. You had an IUD and you're the one-in-zillion it didn't work for? No bad paper. You chose a daily pill and couldn't remember to take it? That probably needs some paperwork. As for registering for Selective Service? Yep. If the system is OK to subject half our citizens to, we can subject the other half as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:15:29 PM EDT
[#13]
I registered for the draft just before active conscription ended, and the voting age was still 21.
The County Clerk was a woman; she could vote, and I could not. Equal Rights, equal responsibilities! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:17:43 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There really isn't a perfect solution. Either UCMJ or deployment anyway, but even those aren't ideal. Then again, if drafted, you are mandating women give over some of the very limited number of reproductive years they have in service to their country while prohibiting them from reproducing, without placing a similar prohibition on the men. As it stands right now, UCMJ if a pregnancy occurs in the lead up to a deployment during an initial enlistment. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I said yes, but you know they'll just get preggers before they ever have to go into harm's way. Depo shots should be mandatory for active duty female soldiers. No. Considering the fact that it can have severe side effects and isn't appropriate for all women, that's a terrible idea. Why not just put all male soldiers on Lopressor while you're at it? You have a solution for pre deployment pregnancy then? Male pregnancy has never been an issue. The only other idea I can come up with is UCMJ punishment for getting knocked up on duty. Dishonorable discharge and some time in the brig. There really isn't a perfect solution. Either UCMJ or deployment anyway, but even those aren't ideal. Then again, if drafted, you are mandating women give over some of the very limited number of reproductive years they have in service to their country while prohibiting them from reproducing, without placing a similar prohibition on the men. As it stands right now, UCMJ if a pregnancy occurs in the lead up to a deployment during an initial enlistment. If things get bad enough for a draft, your plans for starting a family mean jack and shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:25:13 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Shojld be grounds for a class action suit against the government for all males who are required to when women aren't. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile That has been done before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rostker_v._Goldberg Looks like the USSC has already setup the first step towards implementation. In the majority opinion, Justice William Rehnquist wrote "[t]he existence of the combat restrictions clearly indicates the basis for Congress' decision to exempt women from registration. The purpose of registration was to prepare for a draft of combat troops. Since women are excluded from combat, Congress concluded that they would not be needed in the event of a draft, and therefore decided not to register them." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:27:39 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
"If your objective is true and pure equality, then you have to look at all aspects and at some point Selective Service will have to be one of those things considered very carefully," This statement is bullshit. Why? Because if the objective is true and pure equality, then there is absolutely no question, and nothing needs to be "considered", let alone "considered carefully". That is what needs to simply be said, and not keep pussyfooting around. Equality is equality. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 9:56:37 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Equal rights is what they want, Then equal rights is what they shall get. This. I actually use this as an example of why I say it isn't about equal rights it is about special treatment when discussing the topics with women. Some actually stop and think about it and agree with me. Most just get emotional and say it is different not fucking hypocrisy. Always nice to work it in by the third date because her response to it is a pretty good indicator of whether or not she is worth my time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:00:38 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I honestly couldn't remember doing it, but apparently I did in January 1998. I would have been 19, so I guess I procrastinated. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't see the purpose of "signing up" for Selective Service. ETA: I remember a thread here awhile back and was surprised to see how many people skipped it. https://www.sss.gov/Registration/Check-a-Registration/Verification-Form I honestly couldn't remember doing it, but apparently I did in January 1998. I would have been 19, so I guess I procrastinated. Could be worse. I was standing in formation during mail call at AIT. The cadre looks at the Platoon Guide and goes look at the return address. I had a flash of insight that it was mine and from selective service. Sure enough. I got to do push ups for being the unpatriotic motherfucker who did not register for the draft. It never crossed my mind I needed to. I enlisted in the Guard and started going to drills a month after I turned 17. I turned 18 in basic training. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:03:09 PM EDT
[#19]
They want equality, give it to them. All of it. No training wheels.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:29:50 PM EDT
[#20]
I voted "yes". And if men are actually being drafted and sent in harm's way, best be finding a way to get some women killed too. Because equal means equal.
As for the pregnancy issue, I have no problem with the idea of women who get knocked up during their mandatory term of service or at anytime afterwards that interferes with a scheduled deployment getting booted with a BCD. Of course, if the baby daddy is a service member the same would apply to him, E-1 or 0-10, all the same. Because equal means equal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:34:59 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I voted "yes". And if men are actually being drafted and sent in harm's way, best be finding a way to get some women killed too. Because equal means equal. As for the pregnancy issue, I have no problem with the idea of women who get knocked up during their mandatory term of service or at anytime afterwards that interferes with a scheduled deployment getting booted with a BCD. Of course, if the baby daddy is a service member the same would apply to him, E-1 or 0-10, all the same. Because equal means equal. If one is still capable of deploying to combat and the other is not, what do charge the one that can deploy with? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:42:15 PM EDT
[#22]
Bugs don't care if your Male or Female
Everyone fights, nobody quits  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:46:40 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I voted "yes". And if men are actually being drafted and sent in harm's way, best be finding a way to get some women killed too. Because equal means equal. As for the pregnancy issue, I have no problem with the idea of women who get knocked up during their mandatory term of service or at anytime afterwards that interferes with a scheduled deployment getting booted with a BCD. Of course, if the baby daddy is a service member the same would apply to him, E-1 or 0-10, all the same. Because equal means equal. Simple enough fix. Require them to accept a birth control implant, such as Nexplanon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:46:56 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Either everyone or no one should be required to sign up for selective service. End of story. If women want to serve in SEALs, Rangers, etc, fine BUT they also should be assigned the same MOS as men do, no exceptions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:51:08 PM EDT
[#25]
How does adding women to the draft help our nation?
Following some bad ideas with more bad ideas "because fuck you" seems to be a bit silly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:53:09 PM EDT
[#26]
No, no, no, that's not how equal rights work. Equal rights means they get to pick and choose the standard they want to be held to based on which is most advantageous at the time.
It's not about "equal all the time" it's about "equal when it's convenient". |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 10:56:56 PM EDT
[#27]
They get the whole package.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 11:03:40 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Simple enough fix. Require them to accept a birth control implant, such as Nexplanon. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I voted "yes". And if men are actually being drafted and sent in harm's way, best be finding a way to get some women killed too. Because equal means equal. As for the pregnancy issue, I have no problem with the idea of women who get knocked up during their mandatory term of service or at anytime afterwards that interferes with a scheduled deployment getting booted with a BCD. Of course, if the baby daddy is a service member the same would apply to him, E-1 or 0-10, all the same. Because equal means equal. Simple enough fix. Require them to accept a birth control implant, such as Nexplanon. Nope, not for draftees. The decision to use hormonal birth control is a complex one involving a range of medial and ethical issues. Not fucking is pretty simple. Now I'm all in favor of requiring a birth control implant for women who want to volunteer for service. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 11:08:58 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How does adding women to the draft help our nation? Following some bad ideas with more bad ideas "because fuck you" seems to be a bit silly. If it's done for that reason - and it appears from some comments, that's possible - then I agree with you. I would support if because I think it's the fair thing to do - one gender should not get a free ride on the back of the other. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2015 11:18:05 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bugs don't care if your Male or Female Everyone fights, nobody quits would you like to learn more? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 12:47:43 AM EDT
[#31]
For me it's not a matter of being a dick about it. I'm serious when I say equal means equal and how can we be equals if gender acts as a pass for doing dirty work? Besides that if we required women to register it might cause enough stink to eliminate that last remnants of a draft system anyway which would be fine with me as well since I don't support conscription in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:07:16 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Equality ain't all it's cracked up to be. This. I vote for option C, let's get back to reality. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:09:14 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
On one hand I say yes. If they want equality they have to take the good with the bad. On the other hand they tend to get bitchy and camplain when they have to go somewhere or do something they don't want to do. Does the military really want to put up with that? They already do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:16:01 AM EDT
[#34]
Equality of reward...equality of risk
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 2:05:05 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There really isn't a perfect solution. Either UCMJ or deployment anyway, but even those aren't ideal. Then again, if drafted, you are mandating women give over some of the very limited number of reproductive years they have in service to their country while prohibiting them from reproducing, without placing a similar prohibition on the men. As it stands right now, UCMJ if a pregnancy occurs in the lead up to a deployment during an initial enlistment. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I said yes, but you know they'll just get preggers before they ever have to go into harm's way. Depo shots should be mandatory for active duty female soldiers. No. Considering the fact that it can have severe side effects and isn't appropriate for all women, that's a terrible idea. Why not just put all male soldiers on Lopressor while you're at it? You have a solution for pre deployment pregnancy then? Male pregnancy has never been an issue. The only other idea I can come up with is UCMJ punishment for getting knocked up on duty. Dishonorable discharge and some time in the brig. There really isn't a perfect solution. Either UCMJ or deployment anyway, but even those aren't ideal. Then again, if drafted, you are mandating women give over some of the very limited number of reproductive years they have in service to their country while prohibiting them from reproducing, without placing a similar prohibition on the men. As it stands right now, UCMJ if a pregnancy occurs in the lead up to a deployment during an initial enlistment. Don't you think saying a time span of 30 years is very limited a bit of an exaggeration? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 2:15:38 AM EDT
[#36]
They should be and I've been lobbying my Congresscitters with that request for a while and even included the phrase "automatic registration to vote along with selective service registration as the right to vote and defend this nation is something that goes hand in hand." Using other bills as a template, I drafted a couple of sample bills and passed them around to stoke the fire of interest.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 4:47:26 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Either everyone or no one should be required to sign up for selective service. End of story. Agreed. I don't know why women aren't required to sign up for selective service now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 5:40:46 AM EDT
[#38]
Yes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 5:58:37 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If one is still capable of deploying to combat and the other is not, what do charge the one that can deploy with? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I voted "yes". And if men are actually being drafted and sent in harm's way, best be finding a way to get some women killed too. Because equal means equal. As for the pregnancy issue, I have no problem with the idea of women who get knocked up during their mandatory term of service or at anytime afterwards that interferes with a scheduled deployment getting booted with a BCD. Of course, if the baby daddy is a service member the same would apply to him, E-1 or 0-10, all the same. Because equal means equal. If one is still capable of deploying to combat and the other is not, what do charge the one that can deploy with? Conspiring to assist someone else to avoid deployment, accessory to the crime so to speak. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:07:11 AM EDT
[#40]
Hey... they want equality right?
This is part of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:15:06 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't you think saying a time span of 30 years is very limited a bit of an exaggeration? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have a solution for pre deployment pregnancy then? Male pregnancy has never been an issue. The only other idea I can come up with is UCMJ punishment for getting knocked up on duty. Dishonorable discharge and some time in the brig. There really isn't a perfect solution. Either UCMJ or deployment anyway, but even those aren't ideal. Then again, if drafted, you are mandating women give over some of the very limited number of reproductive years they have in service to their country while prohibiting them from reproducing, without placing a similar prohibition on the men. As it stands right now, UCMJ if a pregnancy occurs in the lead up to a deployment during an initial enlistment. Don't you think saying a time span of 30 years is very limited a bit of an exaggeration? No, considering that the time for responsible pregnancy is less than half that, realistically. Teen pregnancy? Not advisable. After 35? High risk. A window of 10-15 years, maybe, and a draft could fall right in the middle of that. Compare that to the lifelong ability of a man to sire children, and yes, it's pretty damned limited. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:17:42 AM EDT
[#42]
I'd rather just get rid of the whole thing.
There's never going to be a draft. A serious, all-out, war involving the US would start with nuking every city and destroying the infrastructure needed to draft and train people. Smaller shit is handled just fine with volunteers. The whole thing is a joke. Let's stop wasting time and money printing off the sign-up cards. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:18:53 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Conspiring to assist someone else to avoid deployment, accessory to the crime so to speak. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I voted "yes". And if men are actually being drafted and sent in harm's way, best be finding a way to get some women killed too. Because equal means equal. As for the pregnancy issue, I have no problem with the idea of women who get knocked up during their mandatory term of service or at anytime afterwards that interferes with a scheduled deployment getting booted with a BCD. Of course, if the baby daddy is a service member the same would apply to him, E-1 or 0-10, all the same. Because equal means equal. If one is still capable of deploying to combat and the other is not, what do charge the one that can deploy with? Conspiring to assist someone else to avoid deployment, accessory to the crime so to speak. Under Art 81 all one has to say is I told her to get an abortion and the withdrawal clause would render them not guilty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:21:16 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Under Art 81 all one has to say is I told her to get an abortion and the withdrawal clause would render them not guilty. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I voted "yes". And if men are actually being drafted and sent in harm's way, best be finding a way to get some women killed too. Because equal means equal. As for the pregnancy issue, I have no problem with the idea of women who get knocked up during their mandatory term of service or at anytime afterwards that interferes with a scheduled deployment getting booted with a BCD. Of course, if the baby daddy is a service member the same would apply to him, E-1 or 0-10, all the same. Because equal means equal. If one is still capable of deploying to combat and the other is not, what do charge the one that can deploy with? Conspiring to assist someone else to avoid deployment, accessory to the crime so to speak. Under Art 81 all one has to say is I told her to get an abortion and the withdrawal clause would render them not guilty. There had best be proof, i.e a notarized statement signed by both parties. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:29:22 AM EDT
[#45]
Conscription. People that are to fucking stupid for that lose citizenship and all the rights that go with it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:36:04 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There had best be proof, i.e a notarized statement signed by both parties. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I voted "yes". And if men are actually being drafted and sent in harm's way, best be finding a way to get some women killed too. Because equal means equal. As for the pregnancy issue, I have no problem with the idea of women who get knocked up during their mandatory term of service or at anytime afterwards that interferes with a scheduled deployment getting booted with a BCD. Of course, if the baby daddy is a service member the same would apply to him, E-1 or 0-10, all the same. Because equal means equal. If one is still capable of deploying to combat and the other is not, what do charge the one that can deploy with? Conspiring to assist someone else to avoid deployment, accessory to the crime so to speak. Under Art 81 all one has to say is I told her to get an abortion and the withdrawal clause would render them not guilty. There had best be proof, i.e a notarized statement signed by both parties. You obviously never been in the position to administer military justice, in the name of everyone being the same we forget people are not the same |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:37:53 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Equal rights is what they want, Then equal rights is what they shall get. Except they don't want equal rights, they want preferential rights. The ones that squawk about equality all the time though that is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:43:33 AM EDT
[#48]
I would take serious umbrage to the idea of a daughter of mine being susceptible to a draft.
Fuck that noise. lol at the folks here who are so wrapped up in their "us versus them" thinking they are OK with this. How the fuck have we gotten this derpy in less than 8 years? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:44:37 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Equality and all. They want the right to serve in combat arms then they should get the duty to go along with it. Who the fuck is "they?" Was there some universal consensus petition I missed? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:45:17 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess the .000001% of women that want to be in combat arms are going to be forcing their equality on everyone else. But, but "they!" |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
