User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 3:50:57 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
My mind is made up. One fucking party with 2 heads doesn't cut it. I don't care who show up with balls, skirt or not, I'm going with it. Anything is better than what we have or could have had in 08. Sarah, Fred, Perot, I don't care, time to make some waves. That is all. I tried that when Bush Sr, Perot, and Clinton wren running. It didn't turn out well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 3:51:23 PM EDT
[#2]
Both sides have valid points here. John McCain would have been better, as in less bad, than Obama. There is no question about that. The argument that both parties are the same doesn't fly. A blind, deaf mute could see and point out the differences between McCain and Obama.
On the other hand, we can't reward the GOP for bad behavior. McCain was a horrible candidate for them to run, and though I realize why they ran the worst candidate they could find, I don't agree with their decision to do so. We need someone who shares our principles and sticks to them once he gets in office. The answer? We fight for our guy in the primaries and don't let the GOP nominate people with leftist tendancies. If they do so anyway? That is a personal choice for each person to make. I won't criticize anyone for refusing to compromise what they consider core principles. At the same time, I suggest that some compromise is probably necessary, and you should decide what you'd be willing to trade for what before the time comes to make that trade. Also realize the upsides and downsides to any decision you make and think about them carefully. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 3:56:01 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, because there's no difference bewteen what McCain would have done and what Obama has done/is trying to do. 
You're cutting off your nose to spite your face, and it's ridiculous. I disagree. Now is the best time to start putting some support behind a 3rd party. Better than waiting till election year. Just don't let it be Ron Paul.  Why? To divide the Right even more? -K There is no right. This is what people don't get today. We have left and center left. McCain or Obama, Romney or Clinton it makes little difference. In all honesty would four years under McCain have really been much better? Not enough to continue holding your nose at the ballot box. I for voted McCain/Bush/Bush and still regret that today. It will not happen again. Until the GOP moves back to the right third parties will get my vote. Fuck the Republicrats and their RINO offerings. So we can count on you to help Obama get elected then, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:03:13 PM EDT
[#4]
Someone's gotta do it. . . . And I'm not a troll, I just wanted to bring some humor into this thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:03:43 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, because there's no difference bewteen what McCain would have done and what Obama has done/is trying to do.
You're cutting off your nose to spite your face, and it's ridiculous. I disagree. Now is the best time to start putting some support behind a 3rd party. Better than waiting till election year. Just don't let it be Ron Paul. I've been hearing that for 20 years now. So far, it been universally wrong, but I like you're style. I say 2012 is the year that all changes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:06:10 PM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:07:47 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
As I must mentioned in another thread, the lesson of Ross Perot was never learned. Splitting the vote will guarantee the Dems have a free run. Our only hope is changing the Republican party. I learned it very well and have been arguing against a repeat of that disaster since it occured. Unfortunately, many seem to have not learned that same lesson. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:10:56 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Here's my thread from election time: http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=781846 did we actually think McCain had a prayer??????? Casting my vote for that sad sack is one of my life's great regrets. I regret nothing. McCain, while distasteful, would have been better than Obama. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:13:54 PM EDT
[#9]
Crowds of Checker players....everywhere
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:14:10 PM EDT
[#10]
I always vote for the wacko third party type candidates in the primary, but come election day I don't waste my vote.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:17:10 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Yeah, because there's no difference bewteen what McCain would have done and what Obama has done/is trying to do. You're cutting off your nose to spite your face, and it's ridiculous. McCain's Straight Talk Express and Obama's inauguration train both go to the same station. One's just slower, so continue to vote for the slow death if that's how you want it. McAin wouldnt be pushing Universal heathcare right now. He would be pushing Amnesty for illegals and closing the "gun show loophole." Just a different form of evil. Yup. Just like W wanted amnesty, signed the Kennedy education bill into law, and gave us Medicare Part D. All aboard the Socialist Express. McAin wouldnt be pushing Universal heathcare right now. He would be pushing Amnesty for illegals and closing the "gun show loophole." Just a different form of evil. Yup. Just like W wanted amnesty, signed the Kennedy education bill into law, and gave us Medicare Part D. All aboard the Socialist Express. YES and YES. 5sub |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:18:31 PM EDT
[#12]
McCain would have been better, but he's walking down the same path every other president (including BHO) has been walking for the last 100 years; the path to more government control, at varying levels of speed.
We can no longer accept this. I know I wont. If you vote for the less of two evils, you aren't wasting your vote. Nor are you voting against less government. You are merely deciding you don't want big government AS FAST as the other candidate wants it. QUIT VOTING (D) vs (R)!!!! If you do, YOU are part of the problem. And to those who think, "Yeah, and we will just get more democrats in the mean time.", you are right. It's gonna get bad before we can get our republic back. Accept this fact, and vote for candidates who put God, the constitution, and our republic above ALL ELSE! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:21:20 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: Casting my vote for that sad sack is one of my life's great regrets. Voting for mccain in 2008 changed my entire view. NEVER again will I vote for a piece of shit like mccaion simply because he 'may' be better than candidate X. I knew mccain was worthless and still I voted for him. 5sub |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:21:48 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
That's the problem. There are no real conservatives to vote for. Give me a pro-choice, anti-interventionist who supports smaller government and reduced taxation without trying to legislate morality, and I'll vote Republican again. As long as we have bible thumpers who seek foreign dragons to slay, you've lost my support. We don't need you, and quite frankly, we don't want you. If we have to give up everything we stand for, we have already lost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:24:48 PM EDT
[#15]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:25:14 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
My mind is made up. One fucking party with 2 heads doesn't cut it. I don't care who show up with balls, skirt or not, I'm going with it. Anything is better than what we have or could have had in 08. Sarah, Fred, Perot, I don't care, time to make some waves. That is all. It is people like this, that do not understand a thing about politics and how things get done in this Republic, that are destroying this country. You play right into the Liberal's hands. Just continue to "cut off your nose to spite your face". See how well that has worked in the past. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:31:41 PM EDT
[#17]
Maybe, I'll vote for the evil one and get it over with. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:33:08 PM EDT
[#18]
Emperor Obama thanks you
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:37:06 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
Quoted:
My mind is made up. One fucking party with 2 heads doesn't cut it. I don't care who show up with balls, skirt or not, I'm going with it. Anything is better than what we have or could have had in 08. Sarah, Fred, Perot, I don't care, time to make some waves. That is all. It is people like this, that do not understand a thing about politics and how things get done in this Republic, that are destroying this country. You play right into the Liberal's hands. Just continue to "cut off your nose to spite your face". See how well that has worked in the past. You can't reward the GOP for putting forward people like John McCain or Michael Steele, either. If you give up everything you believe in, what's the point? We've already lost before the first ballot was cast. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:43:15 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
You can't reward the GOP for putting forward people like John McCain or Michael Steele, either. If you give up everything you believe in, what's the point? We've already lost before the first ballot was cast. You are certainly correct. But the solution is to get better people on the Republican ticket, not to desert the Republican party. Regardless of how much some people hate to admit it, we have a two-party system. Either a Republican or a Democrat will be elected. Those are the facts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:46:52 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Yeah, because there's no difference bewteen what McCain would have done and what Obama has done/is trying to do.
You're cutting off your nose to spite your face, and it's ridiculous. that's an understatement, if nothing else a republican would at least fight the war on terror better, if nothing else people should vote for the lesser of evils for the sake of the troops. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:48:03 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, because there's no difference bewteen what McCain would have done and what Obama has done/is trying to do.
You're cutting off your nose to spite your face, and it's ridiculous. I disagree. Now is the best time to start putting some support behind a 3rd party. Better than waiting till election year. Just don't let it be Ron Paul. You don't need to try to start an whole new 3rd party. Support the REAL conservative republicans, and get them elected... the 'moderate' Congressmen that survive 2010 and the Senators that didn't face elections will probably turn back into conservatives for fear of being ousted in 2012, 2014 or 2016. There is a good conservative movement within the Republican party right now. Don't waste it with the 3rd party nonsense |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:48:52 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, because there's no difference bewteen what McCain would have done and what Obama has done/is trying to do.
You're cutting off your nose to spite your face, and it's ridiculous. I disagree. Now is the best time to start putting some support behind a 3rd party. Better than waiting till election year. Just don't let it be Ron Paul. That would do nothing but assure liberal Democratic control of this country for the forseeable future. it would be assurance of America's destruction, we'll be hard pressed to survive 4 years of this president, another 4 would do this country in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:49:18 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Quoted:
That's the problem. There are no real conservatives to vote for. Give me a pro-choice, anti-interventionist who supports smaller government and reduced taxation without trying to legislate morality, and I'll vote Republican again. As long as we have bible thumpers who seek foreign dragons to slay, you've lost my support. We don't need you, and quite frankly, we don't want you. If we have to give up everything we stand for, we have already lost. Ok, so now its cool if I vote 3rd party? Thanks for your permission... but exactly who is "we"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:55:52 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
You can't reward the GOP for putting forward people like John McCain or Michael Steele, either. If you give up everything you believe in, what's the point? We've already lost before the first ballot was cast. How did McCain get the nomination? Republicans voted for him in the primary. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:57:42 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, because there's no difference bewteen what McCain would have done and what Obama has done/is trying to do.
You're cutting off your nose to spite your face, and it's ridiculous. I disagree. Now is the best time to start putting some support behind a 3rd party. Better than waiting till election year. Just don't let it be Ron Paul. That would do nothing but assure liberal Democratic control of this country for the forseeable future. it would be assurance of America's destruction, we'll be hard pressed to survive 4 years of this president, another 4 would do this country in. Do you think it's soley the democrats fault we are where we are today? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:58:15 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That's the problem. There are no real conservatives to vote for. Give me a pro-choice, anti-interventionist who supports smaller government and reduced taxation without trying to legislate morality, and I'll vote Republican again. As long as we have bible thumpers who seek foreign dragons to slay, you've lost my support. We don't need you, and quite frankly, we don't want you. If we have to give up everything we stand for, we have already lost. Ok, so now its cool if I vote 3rd party? Thanks for your permission... but exactly who is "we"? "We" are the majority of Republicans, you know, those stupid Bible-thumpers you hate so much. You want to leave? Good riddance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 4:59:46 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can't reward the GOP for putting forward people like John McCain or Michael Steele, either. If you give up everything you believe in, what's the point? We've already lost before the first ballot was cast. You are certainly correct. But the solution is to get better people on the Republican ticket, not to desert the Republican party. Regardless of how much some people hate to admit it, we have a two-party system. Either a Republican or a Democrat will be elected. Those are the facts. The FACTS, if you want to use that term literally, are that the person with the most votes gets elected. So if that is a fact, then it goes without reason that we need to get more people involved politically, and have those people start voting for the people who believe in God, the constitution, and the integrity of our republic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:00:54 PM EDT
[#29]
Bdgenz thinks the next election is about his feelings.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:02:01 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can't reward the GOP for putting forward people like John McCain or Michael Steele, either. If you give up everything you believe in, what's the point? We've already lost before the first ballot was cast. How did McCain get the nomination? Republicans voted for him in the primary. . Proof positive that the republican party is doomed. Being a republican used to mean something. Now it means "other than democrat" |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:03:36 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can't reward the GOP for putting forward people like John McCain or Michael Steele, either. If you give up everything you believe in, what's the point? We've already lost before the first ballot was cast. You are certainly correct. But the solution is to get better people on the Republican ticket, not to desert the Republican party. Regardless of how much some people hate to admit it, we have a two-party system. Either a Republican or a Democrat will be elected. Those are the facts. The FACTS, if you want to use that term literally, are that the person with the most votes gets elected. So if that is a fact, then it goes without reason that we need to get more people involved politically, and have those people start voting for the people who believe in God, the constitution, and the integrity of our republic. Yes, and the "person with the most votes" is going to be either a Republican or a Democrat. Anyone that says otherwise is being silly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:05:30 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted:
My mind is made up. One fucking party with 2 heads doesn't cut it. I don't care who show up with balls, skirt or not, I'm going with it. Anything is better than what we have or could have had in 08. Sarah, Fred, Perot, I don't care, time to make some waves. That is all. Yah, that Perot thing worked well. Guess you want four more years of the One. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:06:16 PM EDT
[#33]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:09:44 PM EDT
[#34]
Obama thanks you for splitting the vote. Really, you might as well vote for the messiah then.
You're not teaching anybody a lesson, sorry to break it to you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:11:55 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: Obama thanks you for splitting the vote. Really, you might as well vote for the messiah then. You're not teaching anybody a lesson, sorry to break it to you. This is accurate, but not for the reason you think.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:17:07 PM EDT
[#36]
It's a long way off, yet, OP. Why not reserve judgment until we see who the players will be?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:20:05 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Obama thanks you for splitting the vote. Really, you might as well vote for the messiah then. You're not teaching anybody a lesson, sorry to break it to you. I'd take 12 more years of BHO with statues and palaces built in his name if that's what it would take to restore our republic the way the founding fathers meant it to be. Voting party line is why we are screwed right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:20:09 PM EDT
[#38]
I'm not going to read this thread. It only takes the ability to add 2 + 2 to understand what splitting the conservative vote will do. Some have not mastered this higher math form. Hell, even Jethro Bodine knew his gazintas.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:22:07 PM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can't reward the GOP for putting forward people like John McCain or Michael Steele, either. If you give up everything you believe in, what's the point? We've already lost before the first ballot was cast. You are certainly correct. But the solution is to get better people on the Republican ticket, not to desert the Republican party. Regardless of how much some people hate to admit it, we have a two-party system. Either a Republican or a Democrat will be elected. Those are the facts. God knows I've tried. There just wasn't much to choose from this last time around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:23:03 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can't reward the GOP for putting forward people like John McCain or Michael Steele, either. If you give up everything you believe in, what's the point? We've already lost before the first ballot was cast. How did McCain get the nomination? Republicans voted for him in the primary. . Well, there wasn't much to choose from this time around. I'll grant you that. I think that we Republicans let the media do a little too much choosing for our side, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:32:10 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted: Quoted: You can't reward the GOP for putting forward people like John McCain or Michael Steele, either. If you give up everything you believe in, what's the point? We've already lost before the first ballot was cast. How did McCain get the nomination? Republicans voted for him in the primary. . I would add that I believe he won in SC thanks to Fred's short-lived campaign. McCain took a beating in SC in 2000, and he held a grudge ever since. Being the "First in the South," Republicans see winning SC as important so they can set the pace with an early primary victory. I believe that Fred's only purpose in running loping in the primary was siphoning votes from Huckabee, who was popular here because he was a Baptist (I think) preacher. He and McCain are old Senate cronies, and I think Fred was doing Johnny boy a favor by handing him SC. There was not widespread support for McCain in SC. McCain won the palmetto primary with 33% of the vote, edging out Huckabee, who had a 29.9% share. Fred garnered 15.7% of the vote, so had he not won, I have no doubt that Huckabee would have won here (not that I cared for him, either). My point is, McCain didn't win because he was popular. Republicans voted for the lesser evil twice, once in the primary and once in the general election. Regardless of which candidate won, an evil would have taken the oath. The greater evil happened to win. ETA: In the case of the 2008 primary, it was clear that all of the Republican candidates were "lesser evils." None, except Ron Paul, was a conservative who truly believed in the Constitution, limited government power, and the sanctity of individual liberties. That's all we can hope to get from the Republicans going forward: lesser evils. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:33:32 PM EDT
[#42]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:36:26 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, because there's no difference bewteen what McCain would have done and what Obama has done/is trying to do.
You're cutting off your nose to spite your face, and it's ridiculous. I disagree. Now is the best time to start putting some support behind a 3rd party. Better than waiting till election year. Just don't let it be Ron Paul. I agree with this statement. I will be supporting a third party next go around, if I can find one that is worth a damn. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:37:56 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
[That's the problem. There are no real conservatives to vote for. Give me a pro-choice, anti-interventionist who supports smaller government and reduced taxation without trying to legislate morality, and I'll vote Republican again. As long as we have bible thumpers who seek foreign dragons to slay, you've lost my support. With your set of requirements, you will have trouble finding viable candidates. Consider this political calculus: 1) Which is more important: free markets (small government) or "a woman's right to choose"? Consider how much legislation Congress creates, and the fact that well over 90% of it is primarly economic in impact. Sure, there is the rare, symbolic legislation that concerns flag burning, gay marriage, etc., and everyone goes apeshit, but the real impact is in the legislation with heavy economic impact . . . 2) What happens if we get more big government? What is the result, say, if 0bama gets his way on cap & trade and medical care and immigration? 3) What happens if Bible thumping conservatives strike down Roe V Wade? The 10th still prevents a federal ban on abortion (and I think even few Bible thumpers would violate the 10th). The result would be the feds throwing the issue back to the states. UT would likely ban abortions, CA would probably provide state funding . . . 4) How are Bible thumpers going to strike down R V W? They would have to pack the court, not easy. I'm more or less neutral on the abortion debate, but even if I was "pro choice" the above logic weighs economic considerations, free markets, and small government as a much more important issue. Abortion is an emotional flashpoint, but from a pragmatic perspective, not that important of an issue. The feds will not ban it. Roe V Wade probably won't be overturned dispite the weak logic of the decision. If it is overturned, it will become a state issue. So, if I was you, I'd ditch the abortion issue as a primary decider. The economic one remains a primary decider. I won't delve into the intervention thing here, since I don't want to confuse the issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:47:51 PM EDT
[#45]
The "right" is going to be split into two main camps for the foreseeable future and the thing seperates these camps is "God".
Personally I would prefer to see more Republicans of the Isolationist/Small Government/Low Taxes/Individual Liberty/Religiously Apathetic mode. One issue that the above type of Republican is going to have is that the "Right" is unwilling to even consider engaging in a conversation about reorganizing / reallocating and reducing military spending. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:50:09 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
The "right" is going to be split into two main camps for the foreseeable future and the thing seperates these camps is "God". Personally I would prefer to see more Republicans of the Isolationist/Small Government/Low Taxes/Individual Liberty/Religiously Apathetic mode. One issue that the above type of Republican is going to have is that the "Right" is unwilling to even consider engaging in a conversation about reorganizing / reallocating and reducing military spending. Both sides need to find common ground and work to achieve it. They used to do this. There is no reason it can't be done now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:50:53 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted:
RON PAUL R3VOLUTION! Fuck the repubs. Fuck the dems. They are both one and the same. gay |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:57:47 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Quoted:
[That's the problem. There are no real conservatives to vote for. Give me a pro-choice, anti-interventionist who supports smaller government and reduced taxation without trying to legislate morality, and I'll vote Republican again. As long as we have bible thumpers who seek foreign dragons to slay, you've lost my support. With your set of requirements, you will have trouble finding viable candidates. Consider this political calculus: 1) Which is more important: free markets (small government) or "a woman's right to choose"? Consider how much legislation Congress creates, and the fact that well over 90% of it is primarly economic in impact. Sure, there is the rare, symbolic legislation that concerns flag burning, gay marriage, etc., and everyone goes apeshit, but the real impact is in the legislation with heavy economic impact . . . 2) What happens if we get more big government? What is the result, say, if 0bama gets his way on cap & trade and medical care and immigration? 3) What happens if Bible thumping conservatives strike down Roe V Wade? The 10th still prevents a federal ban on abortion (and I think even few Bible thumpers would violate the 10th). The result would be the feds throwing the issue back to the states. UT would likely ban abortions, CA would probably provide state funding . . . 4) How are Bible thumpers going to strike down R V W? They would have to pack the court, not easy. I'm more or less neutral on the abortion debate, but even if I was "pro choice" the above logic weighs economic considerations, free markets, and small government as a much more important issue. Abortion is an emotional flashpoint, but from a pragmatic perspective, not that important of an issue. The feds will not ban it. Roe V Wade probably won't be overturned dispite the weak logic of the decision. If it is overturned, it will become a state issue. So, if I was you, I'd ditch the abortion issue as a primary decider. The economic one remains a primary decider. I won't delve into the intervention thing here, since I don't want to confuse the issue. Bingo...the social conservatism of the GOP is far less dangerous than the economic policies of the Democratic party. Lesser of two evils. And that evil ain't too bad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:59:16 PM EDT
[#49]
If Palin wins I would watch her any time she was giving a speech and I would have my pants off.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2009 6:03:47 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
gay Who says intelligent debate is dead? |
|
|
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.
