AR-15s

[sexobon]

Bad tw, bad bad, tw. Caught using propaganda technique again I see. Trying to make people prove a need before they can have rights. How un-American.

But then there are mitigating circumstances. Tw grew up in an adverse environment with a father who was a propagandist for big tobacco. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. I don't think we'll put him on the government watch list though. Armchair pomposities are generally benign and good for a few laughs as they undermine their own credibility with their rabid overzealousness.

[tw]

Originally Posted by sexobon

Bad tw, bad bad, tw.

Extremists will say anything to avoid a damning question. Beest asked a damning question. Because he fears to answer, then an extremist will do what Donald Trump also does - attack a person rather than address the issue.

Question remains to be answered: wants verses needs. Why does anyone need a machine whose purpose is to quickly kill people in mass numbers? And can be obtained within hours. Why should anyone too dangerous to board a plane also have the right to buy assault weapons and ammunition in hours? Sexbon's answer remains that is good - until he want to reply in a logical and adult manner with reasons that say why.

Many who love guns for emotional reasons routinely avoid Beest's damning question. It only asks about want verse need. Nothing more. But even that simple question is a threat.

[sexobon]

Originally Posted by tw

Extremists will say anything to avoid a damning question. two Beest asked a damning question. ...

In just your first two sentences in reply to my post there you go lying again tw. Beest didn't ask any questions. He made statements, gave opinions (he's certainly entitled to them); but, he didn't ask any questions. That's just your pathetic attempt to deflect attention away from yourself after having got caught lying, again.

It's apparent that you're taking advantage of Beest because he's a naturalized citizen possibly without the in-depth knowledge that some others here possess. They know that among the reasons for the second amendment having been included in the Constitution is maintaining a pool of civilians already trained in firearms use who can be called up, trained in group tactics, and deployed as a well regulated militia (as opposed to vigilantes). That is very much with us yet as evidenced by the fact that we still have a selective service registration requirement despite our current volunteer military. Beest's sons may have to register for it.

There have always been those who wanted to own the military issue rifle of their time in case they were called to serve and there have always been those wanted to own it after their service with it. The fully automatic fire M16 rifle and its variants have been with us for nearly a half century and millions of people have been trained with it. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that people want what they're familiar with because it makes for better usage.

The AR15 is the semiautomatic fire civilian version of the military firearm. It doesn't have fully automatic fire capability (spray and pray); or, even selective 3 round burst capability. It does still have the basic configuration for use and maintenance as the military version that so many are familiar with and it can still be used for purposes that it's not the optimum firearm for. All military personnel are not each issued a dozen different small arms intended for specialized applications. They use what they have in hand, their rifle.

No one has to prove they need a right to bear arms; or, any particular arms for that matter. You have to prove that they don't. Prove it to the majority of the US Supreme Court; or, prove it to enough representatives to get the Constitution changed. If you can't do that; then, you've failed to establish that your needs for people not to have them outweigh even the wants of the people who have them and you deserve what you get: having a pathological liar like tw speak for you.