Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Durkin Tactical Franklin Armory
User Panel

Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 12:11:43 PM EST
I want the best....And to me the best rifle is the AR.
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 1:07:29 PM EST
i NEED mine because viagra doesn`t work anymore!
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 1:09:05 PM EST
besides, it`s not a MILITARY weapon, it is a TARGET rifle....pullease.....
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 1:24:31 PM EST
Sorry guys, I should've made myself clear.

I didn't mean to sound like a troll at all or get you riled up.

I appreciate those of you who gave me straight answers.

All of those questions I asked were quoted from another kid at school, and as I said, were not my opinions at all, who is writing a paper on why 'assault rifles like ak-47 and ar-15' should be banned...
I came up with several reason on why they should be legal, but I wanted some more so I could completely disprove him.

How am I supposed to find information such as opinions by searching on the library?

The paper I'm writing about is that there should be NO gun-control for law-abiding citizens.

For the person who asked why am I hoping to get an ar-15, it is because I don't have $600 on me right now, and havne't been shooting for all that long.

And I know that AR-15's are assault weapons, but that's what he called them, so I chose that as my words when I was posting that in the 'shoes of a liberal'.  

Link Posted: 2/26/2001 1:38:57 PM EST
i own sport utility rifles because they are an effective means of "bill of rights insurance"

possession does not infringe upon the right of others.

they are fun to shoot.

it makes for a good political statement.

Link Posted: 2/26/2001 1:43:07 PM EST
plus "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms..."

it doesnt say the right of the people to keep and bear sporting arms or bear arms for sporting use. it just says "arms" what is an armament?
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 2:24:05 PM EST

Why do you need one?  

A military assault weapon is a bit excessive for home defense, and could go through walls to hurt innocent people, a shotgun will do just fine.
View Quote

Just to respond to this little part. An AR or a .223 caliber weapon is a superior "home defense" tool. The ballistics of the round are such that overpenetration is almost nonexistent. In tests 12 guage 00 buck over penetrates furthewr than the .223 fired out of a rifle. In fact, the .223 tends to break up in wall material, and in human bodies. What comes out are mostly harmless fragments of jacket material. A pistol bullet will likely penetrate the walls of your residence and could likely injure or kill your nieghbor, where a .223 fired out of a rifle likely will not.
It is for this , among other reasons, that Law Enforcement is going with the .223 rifle and relegating the shotgun to use "less lethal" rounds.
Take care,
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 2:38:49 PM EST
Hey there buddy or whatever asking about ASS- AULT WEAPONS, judging from your statement, I would bet that you are good at making sentences when given one word like, "constitution", to make a sentence, or are you like so many idiots out there, who answered, but only after scratching their heads for 3 or 4 minutes, "I was constitution for three days and finally went this morning!"
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 2:42:39 PM EST
Why I "Need" an AR-15:

Like the current AntiUSSA or McUzi in their relationship snafus....

The bitch told me my Johnson was too small, she went for Mr. Bigger Better C*ck....

My manhood now affronted, I felt a need to supplant the ideas of self worth with some other  form.....

So I bought a Corvette, A big Block truck, a House, AND....An AR-15 as well as a Mini-14...

The mini is sort of a misnomer as it keeps up with most Semi-Auto's.

You see the bitch was ALSO the Crank Addict from hell who dealt the Sh!t from my rental.

I had taken her back into my house yet again....Yes I hear the chorus of "Whadda Pussy", I had given my TRUCK to drive, and for ONE night she was mine again.

She had expected me to take off for work that afternoon but I decided to hang out. I had taken apart my weapons and locked em away, her 3yr old  abd all.

Up comes her OTHER "Boyfriend"????

Come to take her away, with the plan being to off load all my SH!T too.

Ha.... Walking around with the crummy Jennings 22lr throw down I had and since parted with.

He and Shebitch were down the FlICKIN' road.

Why do I need or want a Semi Automatic rifle???

Shortly there after they and other Drug Addicts made attempts to rip me off but having some shooting buddies that were willing to hang at my place with access to weapons thwarted the attempts.

Now I have a new location, and peace of mind, until the anti-gunner A$$HEADS like you maybe, come for my approved weapons.

Die on my feet, NOT live on my knees.

Link Posted: 2/26/2001 2:57:10 PM EST
The very first rifle I learned to shoot with in a safe and  responsible manner was a M16A2 in Marine Corps boot camp. I have become accustomed to the functioning and ergonomics of this style rifle. The AR15 is the legal, civilian, semi-auto only, "sport utility rifle" counterpart of the military M16A2. And since it is legal to own an AR15 and I like to take part in the shooting sports, the AR15 is the best rifle for me.
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 4:24:44 PM EST
Opesus, I must admit that this sort of question reeks of trolldom, but on the off chance that you actually are a kid who wants an AR-15 and not some reeking communist thug, I'll answer.  I am a member of an organized volunteer militia organization.  We firmly believe that our right to keep and bear arms includes any and all legal firearms, but especially firearms suitable for service in the Militia, in defense of ourselves and the State.  Militia service by the able-bodied men of the population is a long and honorable tradition.  Seven years ago, when we organized our group, we decided that we would do our best to become potential leaders, and did not consider ourselves "just troops."  In that endeavor, each of us set out to obtain enough weapons and equipment to provide for four men (three others, and oneself) in order that the Militia, if called to arms, would be able to rapidly expand by at least a factor of four.  Most of us actually now have more rifles than that.  I own two MAK-90s, an NHM-91 with 75-round drum magazines, three standard AR-15's and a huge pile of LBE's, ALICE packs, ammunition bandoleers, a Unit One corpsman's bag, a military stretcher, radios, etc., etc., etc. plus a whole bunch of "civilian" rifles and shotguns.  We didn't really believe, way back when, that the goal of obtaining all those rifles and all that equipment was very possible, but over the years, twenty and thirty bucks at a whack, most of us have done it, and a lot more too.  So.  You know where to go if TSHTF---the Militia has a rifle waiting for you.  But if you accept our rifle, you follow the orders of the leader.  Simple, yes?  I thought so.  Some people are mature enough to understand this, and some aren't.  We're looking for more mature, responsible members.  And we find them, a few at a time.
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 4:31:29 PM EST
Originally Posted By Gun Toter:
I need one because it fits just perfect into the electric gun rack in my JBT Squad car.  Also, its an awesome weapon.
View Quote

[green]An electric gun rack? What does that do, keep your AR warm?[/green]
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 5:07:27 PM EST
Oh man - some of you guys are pitiful as far as knowledge and debating skills.

No wonder the liberals are kicking our a**es.


1. The Law of the Land, the Constitution of the United States is clear, and the 2nd Amendment that specfically states the right to bear arms exists, and is inalienable.
The correspondance of the founding fathers, that exists to this day, spells out the clear intent of the common man to be able to possess firearms for protection of himself, family, country, and if necessary against a overbearing and dicitatorial government that may exist in the future.
Remember the conflict that was inprogress with England at the time of the writing of the Consitiution.

2. Law enforcement cannot protect the citizens from all crime. I am a LEO. As long as I am with you, you are safe. When I leave, you are alone.

There are actually court decisions that state police are not obligated to provide protection to all citizens (I know it sounds bizarre).

3. Just from a crime standpoint - If I am not obligated to protect you and yours, then who is?
Most rational people would conclude you are.

Now, the predators that are in your town are street smart, big, strong, and vicious.
Unless you are all of the above you literally need an equalizer. Does it have to be a firearm.
No. That is your option.

A street "rule of thumb" - In use of force situations and in particular escalation of use of force you always respond one level higher in use of force than had been used on you, if you want to sucessfully overcome the other, not to mention survive.

He uses his mouth, you have a stick. He uses a stick you have a knife. He uses a knife, you use a gun, etc.

4. General survival. Without the delicate infrastructor we survive on life would grind to a halt in 1 day. Fuel supplies, food, clothes are all supplied neatly for daily existance, only.
Let's say you live where earthquakes or hurricanes hit once every 10 years or so, and devastate the region. Flordia, Califorina, East Coast from Flordia to say...Virginia.
You ever seen the newscasts where survivors of a disaster are lined up just to get food and water?? Civilization just stops.

What if you had prepared and had a well, or water stocks, and a generator and some food. People out there will want your stuff. They got guns and want to survive, but if they take your stuff you could die.
Hard times lead to hard decisions.
Survival is always the choice.

Has the electical power ever gone out where you live. Imagine it for a week, in the winter time.

5. Defense of the country. Is that a real possibility?? Read what Chinese officials have been saying for the last 6 months.
War is not the question but when.
We no longer possess a military capable of fighting on a large scale, prolonged war.
We are back to being responsible for our own defense.
Citizen soldiers now.

Now having said all that we get to the choice of the weapons. The AR15 in its current state of development is well suited for "home defense" or short range action - 200 yards and closer. It is not as heavy as a M14 or Garand, is light recoiling and does not penetrate hard objects well - which is a desired ability under some circumstances, not all though, but that is a different topic.
You can carry a large number of rounds of ammo.
All the other intelligent answers of the other posters apply also.
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 9:00:21 PM EST
Why Drive A Bmw Why Not Get A Escort Or Even A Old Pinto ,  Why Drink Bottled Water When Tap Water Is Just As Good Better With Reverse Osmossis.Why Slam On Hard Working People Who Wish To Own A Weapon Like Ar , Ak Or Uzi.I Would Say Lawyers And Politicans Commit More Crimes Per Year Than All Of The People On This Site .!!Who Brings Drugs Into The Country Everday Hard Working People Or Millionaires With Lots Of Money Trying To Double It In Illeagal Profits.Cia Called it Chemical Warfare.
Do Some Homework And Come Back With A Good Question Worth Answering.Dont bother Us Hard Working peoples Time. If You Needs Some Important Info Chances Are You Could Find The Answer In This Room.So Think Hard Before You Speak.Thanks Gator          GD TROLL
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 9:36:47 PM EST
By definition, anything that is used to assault someone is an assault weapon. An assault rifle is a select-fire rifle capable of fully automatic operation. A military weapon is anything that has been used, to this point in history, as a weapon by a military force. This can be anything from a rock, to a sword, to a flintlock, on up to an atomic weapon. Modern day semi-automatic weapon technology was developed in the late 1800's and has remained essentaily the same for well over a century. Those who have the intent to do harm to others will always find a way to do so. Liberals will always find a way to prevent oneself from protecting oneself, no matter who gets hurt in the process.  
Link Posted: 2/26/2001 11:55:44 PM EST
I like to pick my nose with the straight prong vortex flash hider.
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 4:24:27 AM EST
AR15's are fun to play with and they make me happy  [:D]
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 8:35:37 AM EST
I need an AR rifle, a sporting rifle not an assault weapon... to defend myself and my rights guaranteed by the constitution. That need has been made stronger by attempts to legislate away my rights illegally by the communist liberal democrats. My need has been made stronger by liberal judges allowing criminals to escape justice and continue to prey upon law abiding citizens. Political correctness and media bias has temporally shifted equal protection under the law and constitution to favor the rights of homosexuals , child molestors , non - legal residents , women , and minorities. Hopefully one day my need for an AR will be less , but my right to own one and have one will remain. Hopefully one day common sense and common morals will protect everyones rights under the law without bias. I don't want to take away your freedom, be advised not to try and take mine.
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 9:56:51 AM EST
Why do I need an AR-15?

About 230 years ago, some incredibly gifted, wealthy, slave-owning, white guys looked at Western Civilization and undertook what is undoubtedly the most radical, profound political revolution ever conceived. Despite what the history books say, it really wasn't about taxes, or troops in people's homes, or the price of tea or any of that crap. These men were British subjects, but taxes were lower in the colonies than in Britain at the time of the Revolution, there was unprecedented freedom, particularly on the frontier, and these guys were generally the wealthy elite who could have been colonial governors if they had chosen to. They could have afforded to drink tea until they pissed pure caffeine.
Another misconception was that it was a popular revolution. I don't remember who said it, but one of those old dead white guys said that the colonists were divided roughly into thirds, one third loyalist, one third ambivalent, and one third revolutionary (sound familiar?). It took years of coercion and propaganda to motivate the general public to take up arms against the British.
What was our Revolution all about then? These guys realized, 2000 miles from their ruling country that they had an unprecedented opportunity to revolt and form a radical new self-government, where political power was vested in the People themselves, not in a ruling class.
It was an ideological revolution that is still radical today, with the Constitution as the Blueprint for Freedom. In this system, individual liberty is the beginning and end of all government activity. That is to say, government powers are only supposed to extend so far, and only with the permission of the governed. Ideally, where my rights as a citizen begin, the powers of government come to an abrupt halt. Conversely, the primary function of government is to guarantee my liberties, hence the Bill of Rights.
So what we have is an incredibly radical new power structure, one not truly duplicated anywhere else in the world.

So how does this explain why I need an AR-15 assault rifle?

Link Posted: 2/27/2001 9:58:25 AM EST
Part II:

What the founding fathers knew, and so many of the "People" have forgotten (or never learned), is that Power is a zero sum game. If I have it, the government doesn't, and vice versa. Even many pro-gunners miss the point and we allow ourselves to be distracted with "rights" issues, that, while they exist, aren't specifically addressed by the Constitution (right to hunt, right to self-defense, etc.)
The Constitution, the Blueprint for Freedom, and the Bill of Rights, the non-expiring guarantee of liberty, are about one thing: Power. So don't get confused by other issues here.

If this is a country where Power is truly vested in the People, and the government is
LIMITED by the Constitution, then my ownership of an AR-15 is off limits to the government. The Second Amendment guarantees my Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and the Constitution limits the government to very specific, narrow activities, which does not include regulating guns. So, not only is this right specifically reserved to the
People (or, even with a loose interpretation, the states), it also falls outside of the boundaries outlined in the Constitution for the Federal Govt.

Its a double whammy.
Why is it so important to us? Some people fear a tyrannical government taking over (you think they're "paranoid", despite so many historical lessons I could fill several books; but that's another thread). But most, I believe, are more like me. We still believe in the Revolution and its ideals. We ARE Revolutionaries. Power is vested in
ME, as a citizen, and not in the government. It cannot be taken without my permission, which I do not give. Remember, its a zero sum game, so if the government can infringe those liberties, they really don't exist at all, except in theory. Well, I don't want theoretical freedom. I want the real stuff.
So, some argue, we still have freedom of the press and the rest of it, why the big deal over guns? Well, the Bill of Rights is not a buffet, we don't get to pick and choose. I don't like neo-Socialist rhetoric, but I'm not calling for the abolishment of free speech, am I? Because I know that the First Amendment is also about Power - the Power of information (way deadlier than guns, in the right hands, by the way. Case in point, Hitler, whose propaganda machine convinced the Germans to commit unthinkable atrocities; I digress).
Many of us here in the U.S. see the slow, steady, reversal of our Power structure.
Our rights are becoming more "theoretical" all the time. Anyone see that Dateline NBC story on the Louisiana police who are confiscating cars and money from out of state motorists, without a trial (due process) and are not even charging them with a crime or arresting them? How about the IRS, which in case you aren't familiar, has the power to confiscate just about anything you own with the wave of a bureaucrat's pen. Both of these are examples of activities strictly forbidden by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, yet it happens all the time and there are many more examples beyond these.
So you see, it's not just the Second Amendment where the reversal of Power is evident. Anymore, it seems that the Constitution is just a shell and government doesn't exist for the people, rather the people (taxpayers) exist for the government.
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 9:59:58 AM EST
Part III:

Having never been and American, that's a subtle distinction you may miss, but it's the whole ball of wax to us.
So, like the colonists at Lexington and Concord, this is the issue where we choose to make our stand. Not over taxes, which are atrocious or unreasonable search and seizure, which is rampant, or the separation of powers (who said Klinton could declare war all by himself, anyway?) or any of that other stuff, but over my AR-15. Why? Because like our forefathers (80 civilians on a bridge against 1800 regular troops; how committed were they?), we realize its the foundation of Real Power. Without a weapon capable of providing adequate resistance to overthrow an unjust, un-Constitutional government, the rest of those rights truly are hollow, no longer belong to the people, and can be rescinded at any time by the government (many feel we're already past that point). And then they are not rights, they're privileges. Once again, a subtle difference sure to escape you, given your conditioning.
If the government can take my AR-15, or restrict the amount of ammunition it holds, or restrict further purchases of "Assault Weapons" then the revolution is dead and so are the ideals countless thousands have died for. There's a reason for the Second
Amendment and gun ownership (ESPECIALLY assault rifles), a reason those colonists on that bridge understood; its the last of my rights to go.

THAT'S why I need an AR-15 assault rifle.

Link Posted: 2/27/2001 10:10:33 AM EST
OK here's my reasons:
1. Because I have Steyr AUGs in my safe and I'm hoping any burglars will take the AR's instead.
2. Because I feel inadequate and vulnerable without one.
3. Because I like loud toys that go bang and make a flash. Kinda like a modular fireworks display.
4. Because it pisses off/worries/scares Bill/Hillary Klinton, Janet Reno, etc etc.
5. Because THEY have them too.
6. Because it's legal for me to have them, and I can.
7. Because I can defend my home and property against a bunch of perps.
8. Because I like tinkering with them.
9. Because I like going to the range and shooting them.
10. Because if TSHTF, armament wise I am very well prepared, relatively speaking.

Hope this answers your question and how long have you been with ATF?
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 10:17:12 AM EST
Opesus -

A few quotes for you ( and apologies for the coarser of my brethern in arms) -

[i]James Madison, I Annuals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789):
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." - [This was Madison's original proposal for the "Second Amendment". [/i]

[b]George Mason:
"... to disarm the people -- that was the best and most effective way to enslave them." [/b]

[i]Alexander Hamilton, speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29:
"... but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formitable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights ...."
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." [/i]

[b]James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper No. 46 at 243-244:

"Americans have the right "Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation .... Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." [/b]

[i] Richard Henery Lee, 1788, initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights, printed in "Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican", at 21,22,124 (Univ. of Alabama Press, 1975, Walter Bennett, ed.):
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them." [/i]

[b]Samuel Adams, printed in "Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts", at 86-87 (Peirce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850):
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of The United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ...." [/b]

The Founding Fathers made it CLEAR that the WHOLE REASON for the citizens to own personal firearms was MILITARY in nature. So-called "assault weapons" are the ONLY vehicle that enable me to do what the Founding Fathers intended that I be able to do - to combat a tyrannical invading army, and / or repressive gov't.

Link Posted: 3/29/2001 5:58:39 PM EST
I need the AR to protect my family because by the time the SWAT team arrives and gauges the situation, we would be dead.
1st Article of Evidence; Columbine, the shooters were dead for more than an hour before SWAT entered the building.
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 6:32:31 PM EST
I do not [i]need[/i] one.  At least not right now.  I want one, because I realize that someday I may need one.  It is the same reason I have supplies for an earthquake, the same reason I carry flares and a tool kit in the trunk of my car, the same reason I go shopping for food before I run out, the same reason I wash my clothes before I have nothing but dirty ones.  I believe in being prepared.

Should I need clean clothes, and not have them, the consequences would not be severe.  Should I need food, but I forgot to go shopping, I will be hungry, but that will not last.  Should I need to warn other drivers that I am changing a flat, and not have flares or tools to do the work, that becomes dangerous.  Should I be in an earthquake, and not have the means to take care of myself, that would be dangerous and possibly life-threatening.  Should I ever need an AR, it better be there, because when I [i]need[/i] my AR, is when my life is at stake.
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 6:54:16 PM EST
Hell I live in Ia  For when the MAD COW cometh. Oh hell I've read Animal Farm I guess the pigs pissed the cows off.   [sniper]
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 7:05:23 PM EST
I once thought no one could justify owning a AR-15, no really a hunting rifle. I found them to be pure fun, better for distance shooting than a 22 and not much kick so my wife can have fun with it too. I'm a responsible citizen, so why should'nt I be able to own one???
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 7:19:02 PM EST

I can pretend a lot of things and voice my opinions on them because that is another right I have.


I need an AR-15 for the following condensed reasons: First of all because I live in The United States of America and it is my right to keep and bare arms, to keep my AK-47 from being lonely,( I took that from someone else's post but I liked it so...), I like the fact that I can say I own a better rifle than my Mini-30, I'm lazy and prefer to shoot 30 rounds at a time or more than spending time loading after every shot or every ten shots, It is fun as hell to shoot and anybody that has ever recreationally shot for fun can honestly say that about an AR, There are about 783 more reasons I can think of but the one that sticks out the most in my mind is THAT I CAN!


The .223 is a good hunting round for a number of game. The AR-15 in our gunsafes(most I should say) is quite different from the "military" issued one. But hey....pay the $200 NFA tax and fill out the paperwork and you can have on of those too!


I could use a friggin slingshot, too but it's not very effective for long range and certainly doesn't have the feel of a real shooting experience.


The terminology is incorrect to use above but lets say I have a NFA registered sear and I have a full auto M4, most likely it would be selected for semi auto for home defense. Oh think about this for a minute....If you broke in my house and I pulled my .22 pistol out from my night stand and you were armed you most likely would laugh and fire your stolen intertech 9mm at me.If I pulled my M4 and my 30rd clip loaded with my laser pointed right in the middle of your chest rising up to your forhead slowly while you pissed your pants and run I think I might have a better chance of defending my family and my home. Ofcourse once you saw me hit the laser you would have had at least 3 rounds center mass.(not in the wall FYI!)


They use a number of different weapons and mostly explosives. There not stupid why would they use a non-effective weapon to do there dirty work? Let's convince them to trade there weapons in for .22's?


Link Posted: 3/29/2001 7:24:22 PM EST
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 7:24:52 PM EST
Not need want therefor I have!! Boy colt sure does look happy.
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 7:25:34 PM EST
Rap Music.
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 7:29:48 PM EST
You forgot the C before rap     CRAP
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 7:37:26 PM EST
How silly of me.
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 7:38:00 PM EST
Opesus -

Like some of the others, I too will apologize for the poor behavior of some of the members here.  Whether you are a troll or not, we should be able to explain our position in an intelligent, articulate, and pursuasive manner.  If not, it makes pro-guners look like a bunch of half-literate raving lunatics - definitely NOT the image we should want to portray to the American public.

First, a semi-auto AR15 (with certain features) IS an "assault rifle" if you are using the definitions in the federal statutes.  If you are using common military convention, a semi-auto is NOT an "assault rifle" because it is not capable of auto-fire.

Now, as one who owns true assault rifles, machine guns, and sub-machineguns, I believe the question is not why do I want or need one, but why do I have to justify my possession of such an item?  There are laws against intentionally harming or killing another person, whether by use of  firearm or any other object.  There are also laws against using a weapon of any sort to make an unjustifiable threat against another person.  Through civil suits (as opposed to criminal actions), our society can enforce upon owners of such items as firearms the duty to operate them responsibly and with reasonable care.  Thus, the question is really not why do I need one, but why do I have to justify my responsible possession and use of such a firearm? That is, if I own it and use it responsibly and don't interfere with the rights of others, why should I be prohibited from owning it?  If I don't harm anyone or otherwise commit a crime with such a firearm, why would my ownership or responsible use be a problem? Now, if someone steals my weapon and uses it to kill someone or uses it for another criminal purpose, that may be a problem, but remember, it was brought about by that person's criminal intent and their criminal action (they stole my weapon, they used it in a criminal fashion).  At no point did MY ownership, use, or possession harm another person.
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 8:30:56 PM EST
I'll have to agree with everyone else.... I have one because I CAN. I have other guns to hunt with, I have other guns to defend my home with, I even have a special set I carry to work every night. I think the reason I bought one is because I felt the urge, I could afford it, I can legally own it, and I take it my rights seriously.
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 9:41:06 PM EST
If you are indeed who you say you are these quotes and their sources will be more than you need.

Supporting Quotes - The founders and other great men of our country, quoted below, make it quite clear that Americans possess an inherent right to keep and bear arms and that their main fear for our liberties came not from external forces, but from the very government they were in the process of founding. Any citizen who does not understand this need read no further to begin to gain the knowledge necessary to know why it is not only our right, but our responsibility, to be armed.


"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence. It is force. And force, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." -- George Washington

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." -George Washington, Commanding General of the Continental Army, Father of Our Country and First President of the United States in a speech to Congress, January 7, 1790.
(from, http://www.vomitoxin.com/founding.html)


"The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest possible limits...and [when] the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." -- St. George Tucker, Judge of the Virginia Supreme Court and U.S. District Court of Virginia in Blackstone Commentaries, 1803


"That the Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe on the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent ‘the people’ of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms… "Samuel Adams in arguing for a Bill of Rights, from the book "Massachusetts," Pierce & Hale, 1850 pg. 86-87


"The great principle is that every man be armed.... everyone who is able may have a gun." - Patrick Henry


"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." Tench Coxe in "Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution," under the pseudonym "A Pennsylvanian" in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789.


"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764


"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed whi
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 9:42:40 PM EST

"The right of the people to keep and bear...arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the people, trained to arms is the best and most natural defense of a free country..." -- James Madison, 1 Annals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789).


"Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in our possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" -- Patrick Henry, 3 Elliot Debates 168-169.


"The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by rule of construction be conceived to give Congress the power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both." -- William Rawle, 1825; considered academically to be an expert commentator on the Constitution. He was offered the position of the first Attorney General of the United States, by President Washington.


"One man with courage is a majority." -- Thomas Jefferson


"You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence." -- Charles A. Beard


"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves." -- William Pitt in the House of Commons November 18, 1783


"...Arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace." --Thomas Paine


"However controversial the meaning of the Second Amendment is today, it was clear enough to the generation of 1789. The amendment assured to the people
"...their private arms, ..." said an article which received James Madison's approval and was the only analysis available to Congress when it voted. Subsequent contemporaneous analysis is epitomized by the first American commentary on the writings of William Blackstone. Where Blackstone described arms for personal defense as among the "...absolute rights of individuals..." at common law, his eighteenth century American editor commented that this right had been constitutionalized by the Second Amendment. Early constitutional commentators, including Joseph Story, William Rawle and Thomas M. Cooley, described the amendment in terms of a republican philosophical tradition stemming from Aristotle's observation that basic to tyrants is a "...mistrust of the people; hence they deprive them of arms." Political theorists from Cicero to John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rouseau also held arms possession to be symbolic of personal freedom and vital to the virtuous, self reliant citizenry (defending itself from encroachment by outlaws, tyrants and foreign invaders alike) that they deemed indispensable to popular government.." -- Don B. Kates, Jr., Encyclopedia of the American Constitution, MacMillan Publishing Co, NY, 1986


"The rig
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 9:46:51 PM EST
And therefore it only stands to reason that to defend your constitutional rights a military type weapon is required.
Link Posted: 3/29/2001 11:02:09 PM EST
cuz i can!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![uzi]
Link Posted: 3/30/2001 6:38:39 AM EST
Hey, if Opesus is really a troll the rather
*ahem* light-hearted comments won't really help the matter - makes us look like backward oafs, so the gun-grabbers can keep up their sense of superiority.
I'm a high-school student, also, as it happens, writing up a report(actually not. I just have to teach the class for a day) on the gun laws in America.
I admit to using the term "assault rifle" out of force of habit(stupid media!) even though I'm very well convinced that it's a rather inappropriate term.
Here in gun-free NYC, I've taken to picking up a few gun mags along with my bi-weekly copy of National Review, and while I get odd stares at times I NEVER, EVER answer their questions with something like "I want an AR because I can!!!" or "it's a testosterone thing!". I take it as my responsibility as probably the only (potential) gun-owner they see to project an image of responsibility - not that of a reckless gun nut. Don't take this the wrong way, it's not a personal inditement of anybody on this forum, I laugh as much at these jokes as anybody else, and think there's nothing wrong with wanting a gun for the same reason I want powerful sportscar, but to a gun-grabber it's only fodder for their preconceived notions of us.

But anyway, I've been lurking here and other forums just to get an idea for the market - I'm planning on getting an AR as soon as I'm legally able to - in 17 months, but because college dorms don't allow guns, it might be a bit longer before I find real housing(i.e. where I can do what the hell I want and not have some admin whine about weapons on campus and crap like that) and can then buy an AR.

For Opseus, Why do I want an AR?
1. It'll be another 4.5 years before I can own a handgun and until then I'd rather defend myself(in my home) with an AR than a kitchen knife.
2. if(when) the UN troops knock on my door to take away my ar's as well as my pre-ban showerhead I'd rather be holding an ar than any melee weapon(knife, staff, whatever).
3. I believe it's my responsibility-as an intelligent citizen, to be prepared to defend my country, not just myself, when the blue helmets, or the jack-booted thugs come a-knocking.
It's for this reason that the "assault weapons" ban and BATF limits on importation of non-sporting cartridges worries me. They've already ingrained a sense that we don't need weapons for defense agaisnt governemnt, therefore we only need .22's and BB guns - dangerous slippery slope.

By the way, thanks for the plentiful quotes.
Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
An error occurred on the server when processing the URL. Please contact the system administrator.

If you are the system administrator please click here to find out more about this error.