Consider that these folk also pretend ignorance when it comes to being propagandists for Hamas.
Unarmed protesters. = Soldiers with AK-47s, and infantry weapons common in biblical times. Plus fire bombs & grenades of 20th century vintage.
By now everyone knows my hobbies include the study & training for decades in weapons that a Roman Legion in Jerusalem would consider state of the art. I assure you, millions of dead over thousands of years got just as dead with edged & missile weapons as if vaporized by nuclear shaped charges. It just took longer to get the numbers.
A modern revolver & shotgun from post Civil War technology?
You mean technology so terrifying that the Germans tried to get it BANNED in WW1, while they were using poison gas? ( and German law still considers the American pump shotgun a terror weapon, to this day ) Other than laser sights, nothing about an AR clone is newer than the 19th century. Unless you opt for better plastic grips & modern paint.
Yeah, the revolver is maybe 50 years older than a gas operated semi automatic, in the context of a 500+ year development cycle.....
People generally don't understand how the rate of change in technology has manifested on Earth. 4000 years plus of same old. Then Voltaire-Currie-Tesla- interplanetary spacecraft.
Where you choose to put the beginning of the sudden change in rate of change is less important than it happening.
But guns? Unless you shove a battery in it, or it uses the same Tritium used in H-,bombs, it's all more than a century old except minor details.
I put this picture together as a demonstration of the absurdity of calling AR-15's "weapons of war." Pretty much anything that can kill someone has been an implement of war at one time or another. 20180409_094759 by Slick_Rick77, on Flickr
My problem with that American Thinker article is that it's a bit dishonest.
Let's forget that what he labels "assault weapons" are just semi-automatic rifles that happen to have a military-style appearance (much like putting a Porsche body on a Yugo chassis).
It's time we acknowledge that most AR-15's are exactly military rifles save for missing the extra hole and a half dozen go-fast parts that makes them select fire. Arms are arms. We're supposed to have them. Saying AR-15's aren't similar to military rifles is just as bad as calling them WMD's and suggesting civilian arms are fully automatic (though in reality I don't see why they're not).
The other day I heard some talking heads discussing Fast and Furious. The "conservative" spoke of how these guns are making it back into the US and have killed civilians here. At the same time the rest of us are saying it's not the gun but the sick bastard behind it. So which is it? Fast and Furious was obviously Obama arming the enemy but let's not blame the deaths of our citizens on the Obama gun but on the Illegal alien that used it to murder someone. If he didn't get it from Obama he would have gotten it from the Cartel.
Fast & Furious was when President Obama lied about gun trafficking to take away your civil rights. When called on his lie, Obama started a program to take his lie being real, then lied about That.
Alternatively, he was so ignorant and incompetent, that every action by his minions was a criminal act to follow his obvious wishes, which he then discovered by watching Fox news, to his dismay. But not enough dismay to ever allow those criminals to be prosecuted.
Either scenario has a dishonest and evil regime deliberately harming America, but the second is a child's fantasy of utter blamelessness by an insane person, vs. The truth of deliberate crime.
Why are people so dense? We do not need any new gun laws but those who break existing Gun laws should be prosecuted. Obama and his DOJ forced gun stores to sell guns to criminals in straw purchases. Those illegal guns then were used in a number of crimes including the assassination of a border patrol agent. So therefore, the persons responsible for that program and the selling of weapons to criminals, that are later used in crimes, should be prosecuted.
Just like anyone associated with the Texas shooting that broke Gun laws should be prosecuted. The shooter was 17. He was not legally allowed to be in possession of a gun without supervision of an adult. That's 1 violation there. How did he get possession of the firearms. Maybe the father should be prosecuted. He supposedly used a sawed off shotgun. Also another violation. Who sawed it off? If it was the father, he should be prosecuted. If it was the kid, how do the parents not notice. You can go on and on.
The idea that more laws will stop these things when the offenders are breaking numerous laws leading up to the act is flawed at best.
I understand what Fast and Furious was, I was over simplifying it to make a point. It was actually started by George Bush who put chips in the weapons so they could be traced. The bad guys figured this out and removed the chips so Bush stopped the program. My only point was that a so called conservative was repeating the left's "blame the gun" routine.
The gun is an inanimate object. It does not act on it's own. I can place my fully loaded, chambered AR with the safety off directly in front of you and scream at it all day long and it isn't going to jump up and shoot you or anyone else. It cannot act on it's own. Hence the logic that the left going after the tool instead of those using the tool is flawed, even without considering the 2nd Amendment and the rights it GUARANTEES.
There are plenty of gun laws on the books. The pure fact of the matter is that in most cases the shooters are already violating many of those laws so making more laws likely won't change anything. You just end up violating the rights of law abiding citizens and forcing them to look towards a corrupt government for protection when the standard response time to any 911 call averages over 10 minutes. At that point they are an after action clean up and investigative unit. Even if they did show up in less than a minute, the time they would need to respond to actually prevent a violent crime, I still wouldn't give up my 2nd amendment rights for many reasons which I think should be obvious.
It was actually started by George Bush who put chips in the weapons so they could be traced. The bad guys figured this out and removed the chips so Bush stopped the program.
Actually the Mexican government refused to cooperate, in part because the Drug Gangs own so much of it, ( and feel free to Blame America for making it profitable ) so the Bush folk canceled it years before Eric Holder started his program of deliberately breaking multiple laws, persecuting officers who complained, and threatening law abiding gun shop owners who didn't cooperate. The reason it has the same name is so Holder could LIE about it being a Bush program he was just following.
It's time we acknowledge that most AR-15's are exactly military rifles save for missing the extra hole and a half dozen go-fast parts that makes them select fire. Arms are arms.
I have given this some thought. The reason the pro gunners have been talking the difference is because the anti gunners are lying about the technical details, and in an honest discussion, proving that the other guy is wrong is how you change their mind.
But this isn't an honest discussion on the anti gun side. It's fundamentally dishonest, and the truth doesn't matter to them at all.
It's pure power and oppression. It was Mostly racist anti-negro for the first hundred years, then as the Marxists took over the Klan Party, it gradually morphed into taking ALL guns from ALL people who aren't the Government, or Very Rich Government Sponsors.
Truth is, that ALL kinds of guns, including "pocket pistols" have been military arms, always. The Crossbow in my living room is a 14th century replica, and it's a military weapon that was banned by The Pope at one point.
The Pope banned Swiss mercenaries too. Then he made Swiss Mercs his bodyguard. because they were the most feared and effective. They are still there, at the Vatican... and wear, carry, and use the same weapons I've trained people on. Plus, of course, Swiss made Assault rifles and Swedish Anti-tank missiles are in the guard shack in easy reach. The Swiss Guard is not fooling around. They can kill you at hundreds of yards, or disembowel you up close and personal.
You may have read my rants on the Gaza strip Propaganda campaign where Hamas deliberately puts civilians, children, mothers and babies, in a position to be killed, while the terrorists hide behind them and shoot weapons from 4000 years of history at the Israeli troops.
I'm not sure what the best "argument" is when the other person doesn't care about the truth at all.
You aren't even arguing with them, you should be trying to convince the ignorant masses that the anti-gunners are lying thieves, racist, totalitarian, authoritarian, shills for rich, evil men.
The 2nd amendment is just ALL about military small arms.
Well said Rick.
Tootal, the complaint is against Obama, not the guns. Patrick summarize it well. Liars and schemers of the Left intent upon demonizing guns, lied about reality then tried to make their own desired reality and got caught, so they lied some more to deflect, and of course the complicit AG never recused himself and no special investigator or grand jury was ever convened.
The anger and objection is not about the guns. It's about the liars coopting our govt for their own slimy con job.
To be fair, the ones who aren't actively evil, and that's most people, by far, are afraid.
Almost All people think that others think just like they do. Very few even consider there's a different point of view. I might be pessimistic on the percentages. I hope so.
Most people you run into who don't like you to have a gun, are afraid if they had one, they'd kill people who made them angry. Seriously.
Now, almost all of them wouldn't. ( A few of them are wise not to have sharp things )
And there's some people who feel they just can't defend themselves. In many ways. Could not hurt another person. Even to defend themselves or another. ( I have my own opinion on Mothers & Children. I think the She Bear instinct would win over reasoned cowardice. ) Or, they could, indeed be cowards, who can't face conflict.
I think many people who feel that way are wrong about themselves, but I could just be optimistic, or something.
So, it's not all Nazi wannabe thugs. It's a bunch of very frightened babies. Who are just as dangerous, if not more, and just as likely to be impossible to convince, unless you can take them by the hand, and teach them to be adults.
I thought that was for Parents, but there seems to be a shortage.
Ask your co-worker if he agrees that people of his ethnic group should be registered. Shouldn't there be a government database of his people, just for their own safety? Maybe a discrete tattoo on the forearm, just in case they need government aid? Like free train rides to Free Summer Camp?
History doesn't repeat but it sure does rhyme.
No tattoos & train rides. Chips & bus trips?
Or you could just point out Crystal Night wasn't a Van Gogh painting.
Well, he had the same tired take that cars are registered...and something about moving about freely in the United States being a Constitutional right that isn't absolute. As one can imagine the conversation degenerated from there.