Virginia Democrats pass gun ban

SquaredCircle

Established
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
224
What are you talking about? Right wing goofs? Coming from someone who thinks a 1911 has more practical purpose in a gunfight than an AR15, lol. You don't know anything about firearms. I could find you source after source completely proving your wrong. You don't even need to know much about firearms to understand that an AR15 is more effective than any pistol. It is easier to aim, it is steadier, it has more stopping power, it can fire more rounds, ect... ARs are extremely functional, please stop polluting the discussion with ridiculous non sense like this. At least base your opinions on modicum of facts and logic.

There is no way to win the vote when you bring in constant massive flows of immigrants who don't assimilate or respect the Constitution. If you think people won't go to a Civil War to protect their 2nd Amendment rights you are mistaken. A civil war is an extremely likely scenario with the left beginning to impose it's will on restricting the rights for the rest of us.
Yes an AR 15 is a better gun in a FIRE FIGHT agreed , but that scenario is as likely as Bigfoot flying a UFO . In a home break in were you have family members in other rooms and neighbours your just as likely to kill your kids and neighbours with high power rifle ammo . A 230 grain Federal JHP has way more knock down power that a 55g 5.56 .
Not to mention a 1911 is right under your pillow . You are playing way to much Call of Duty !
If 7 armed men are kicking in your door the odds of you living no matter your weapon of choice is slim to non .
If you hit a 250lb man in center mass with a 45 acp he stops were he is . On top of it the 45 acp 850-975 fps is not going through walls , cabinets etc... and killing other people .
The gun industry had sold a campaign through Magazines and Gun videos the uber great affects of an AR 15 as home defense .
The M16 has been available to civilians for 50 yrs and until the 1994 ASB no one had them as a preferred home protection gun .
The Remington 870 pump 12 g has been and will continue to be the easiest home defense weapon for anyone in a family to use .
Imagine your giant fantasy fire fight and you go down , can your wife or kids with ease use your AR 15 with effect to defend themselves? Absolutely not !
Now a 686 S&W revolver or a pump shotgun are simple to use and very effective at stopping people especially the scatter gun .
I cant help that you as a white man ( I am as well ) are having a identity crisis in a changing world made that does not fit your caucasian Christian ideals .
 






SquaredCircle

Established
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
224
We seriously don’t live in a free society though. We say we do but we don’t. There are like a bajillion laws already on the books limiting our freedoms in a bajillion ways. Yet this seems to be the only issue that most “freedom” lovers seem to care about or argue about.

16 year old kids can’t by lighters for chrissakes. There’s a million valid important reasons to have a lighter. I see no one pissed off about this. But one tiny inconsequential example of all the ways we are decidedly not free.

Freedom is great. It’s important. But where your right to freedom ends is when it rubs up on one of my rights. That’s how it works. Deciding where that line is drawn is the issue. We have a right to own firearms but we also have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Finding a balance is what’s needed when people aren’t responsible in exercising their rights.

@Lurker you truly are all about freedom. Even when we disagree I have a massive amount of respect for that and you as a result. I have never once in all these years seen you contradict yourself. The same can not be said for the majority of these gun right freedom lovers.

@Lurking009 shoes can not kill people. Atleast use a more appropriate comparison.
You are a smart person !
 






Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
1,018
It's called gueralla warfare. The government still can't win in Afghanistan, you drastically overrate them.
Two problems with this logic.

1.) You're overestimating the grit of the weekend warrior. The average fighter in Afghanistan has nothing to lose. Many of them had family killed by American bombs. Some people might be willing to go to jail for their guns... But I think a lot less people are willing to actually die for them.

War, after all, is hell. The majority of these people probably wouldn't be able to actually pull the trigger, will cash out the moment they realized it's not a game.

2.) Eternal war, in foreign lands, is profitable. Eternal civil war is not.

Disarming the populace is a key objective for a one world government. It's not highly unlikely at all. Not sure why you'd be on VC if you think armed conflict with the government is extremely unlikely.
Winning a war against the government is unlikely though.


But let's say we accept that ARs are deadlier. If I knew there was going to be an attack on my life today and I could choose to defend myself with an AR or a handgun, I'm going to take an AR.
The type of gun that's best in self-defense depends on the situation and in most circumstances that isn't actually going to be an AR. It's actually pretty awful in home defense or close-quarters in general compared to a shotgun and if you're on the move a lot, a 9mm handgun would actually be more efficient. Contrary to popular belief, modern 9mm handguns are reliable enough as far as stopping power goes in most circumstances. The ammo is also more common and a lot lighter than any round you'd get in common ARs.

An AR would only be more efficient in circumstances where you've got a lot of targets (and if you're in a situation where a lot of other people with guns are chasing you, it's better to get the fuck out of dodge) or in situations where you have the advantage of range. Most of those aren't cases where it would be useful for "self-defense".
 






justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
5,594
Two problems with this logic.

1.) You're overestimating the grit of the weekend warrior. The average fighter in Afghanistan has nothing to lose. Many of them had family killed by American bombs. Some people might be willing to go to jail for their guns... But I think a lot less people are willing to actually die for them.

War, after all, is hell. The majority of these people probably wouldn't be able to actually pull the trigger, will cash out the moment they realized it's not a game.

2.) Eternal war, in foreign lands, is profitable. Eternal civil war is not.



Winning a war against the government is unlikely though.




The type of gun that's best in self-defense depends on the situation and in most circumstances that isn't actually going to be an AR. It's actually pretty awful in home defense or close-quarters in general compared to a shotgun and if you're on the move a lot, a 9mm handgun would actually be more efficient. Contrary to popular belief, modern 9mm handguns are reliable enough as far as stopping power goes in most circumstances. The ammo is also more common and a lot lighter than any round you'd get in common ARs.

An AR would only be more efficient in circumstances where you've got a lot of targets (and if you're in a situation where a lot of other people with guns are chasing you, it's better to get the fuck out of dodge) or in situations where you have the advantage of range. Most of those aren't cases where it would be useful for "self-defense".
Zombie. Apocalypse.

That’s exactly what this “uninformed” woman just said.
 






Lurker

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,605
16 year old kids can’t by lighters for chrissakes. There’s a million valid important reasons to have a lighter. I see no one pissed off about this.
I, for one, am. However, I take more issue with 18 yo not being able to buy smokes/drinks, but can enlist. I guess a thread on the rank hypocrisy of our legislators is in order.
 






justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
5,594
I, for one, am. However, I take more issue with 18 yo not being able to buy smokes/drinks, but can enlist. I guess a thread on the rank hypocrisy of our legislators is in order.
As I said, you’ve always been consistent and I admire that about you.

I was shocked when my son told me he tried to buy a lighter and got carded and then refused. Shocked. Kids aren’t allowed to light camp fires now?

I had the military/alcohol conversation with my son the other day as well. I told him that they should either be consistent and say no life altering or dangerous decisions until 25 across the board since that’s when science says our brain hits adulthood or just scrap all the age requirements entirely. You can’t be old enough to agree to die for wars you don’t understand but too young to have a beer.
 






Lurker

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,605
I was shocked when my son told me he tried to buy a lighter and got carded and then refused. Shocked. Kids aren’t allowed to light camp fires now?
Fun fact. When I was 15ish, I went to buy cigs...cashier asked if I was 18...I said no...was sold anyway. At 16ish I just lied to the earring place/booth in the mall. Good times. Today at home depot (the cashier didn't say anything) I heard the register beep because I was buying spray paint. If I must have a nanny state, It should do my fucking laundry.
 






justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
5,594
Yeah, CVS is the only place I can count on for being carded. I don't think it's possible to buy enough sudafed for it to be profitable.
It is a state law here. They have to enter my drivers license number in to some database
 






Lurking009

Established
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
408
@Lurking009 shoes can not kill people. Atleast use a more appropriate comparison.
Here's a fun fact: Guns cannot kill people either. It's an inanimate object. People kill people with cars, bombs, knives, hammers, weapons of every kind.

Someone could potentially kill with a stiletto heel. BAN ALL STILETTOS... because frankly, no one needs stilettos.
 






weskrongden

Established
Joined
Nov 30, 2017
Messages
329
Two problems with this logic.

1.) You're overestimating the grit of the weekend warrior. The average fighter in Afghanistan has nothing to lose. Many of them had family killed by American bombs. Some people might be willing to go to jail for their guns... But I think a lot less people are willing to actually die for them.

War, after all, is hell. The majority of these people probably wouldn't be able to actually pull the trigger, will cash out the moment they realized it's not a game.

2.) Eternal war, in foreign lands, is profitable. Eternal civil war is not.



Winning a war against the government is unlikely though.




The type of gun that's best in self-defense depends on the situation and in most circumstances that isn't actually going to be an AR. It's actually pretty awful in home defense or close-quarters in general compared to a shotgun and if you're on the move a lot, a 9mm handgun would actually be more efficient. Contrary to popular belief, modern 9mm handguns are reliable enough as far as stopping power goes in most circumstances. The ammo is also more common and a lot lighter than any round you'd get in common ARs.

An AR would only be more efficient in circumstances where you've got a lot of targets (and if you're in a situation where a lot of other people with guns are chasing you, it's better to get the fuck out of dodge) or in situations where you have the advantage of range. Most of those aren't cases where it would be useful for "self-defense".
Civil wars aren't fought by lazy boomers on their recliners. They're fought primarily by younger, unhappy males. Which is an ever increasing demographic. It is unlikely but having an armed populace takes out the possibility all together. You ignore that portions of LE and the military would defect from the government. We see in Virginia numerous rural counties who have said they would ignore the gun laws passed at the state levels.

I'm a fit and strong guy, so heavier ammo isn't a concern. There is no way I'm choosing a pistol over an AR for defense. Possibly a shotgun for home defense, but that depends on the home and if it's a rural are where stopping power over range might be important. The bottomline is an AR has the most versatile.

Everything you're saying backs up why this ban is completely ridiculous to begin with. In a mass shooting against unarmed people in a room, a pistol is going to do the same amount of damage as an AR. The only reason to ban ARs is to disarm the people in a potential government conflict and/or a first step to total removal of all firearms.
 






justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
5,594
Here's a fun fact: Guns cannot kill people either. It's an inanimate object. People kill people with cars, bombs, knives, hammers, weapons of every kind.

Someone could potentially kill with a stiletto heel. BAN ALL STILETTOS... because frankly, no one needs stilettos.
If there was a proven track record of people using stilettos to kill people. Ok. That would be a conversation we needed to have. If it was decided that stilettos werent worth the risk I wouldn’t cry about it. Your right no one needs them.

I’m not out there advocating to ban assault weapons. But if that’s whats decided I’m not going to cry about it either.

You rant on about freedom here but I’ve seen you advocate taking other freedoms away from people elsewhere. You can’t have it both ways.

There’s also a thing called state rights. And if the majority of Virginians decided this was what was right for them then they are constitutionally within their rights to do so.
 






Lurker

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,605
There’s also a thing called state rights. And if the majority of Virginians decided this was what was right for them then they are constitutionally within their rights to do so.
Agreed, but I wonder if the majority knew what they were voting for.

And even if stilettos kill, let's keep em. Worth the risk.;)
 






justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
5,594
While I understand the concern this was a hotly contested issue in Virginia from what I understand with plenty of media coverage and exposure.

Part of me feels like if you were stupid enough to inadvertently vote for something you didn’t actually want.. that’s your problem. Stupidity and hypocrisy are two things I just have a hard time tolerating or finding sympathy for. And I am fully aware that the disdain for stupidity is my own bias possibly elitist shit. I just feel like there’s no excuse, with the internet and everything that comes with it in people’s hands 24/7.
 






Lurker

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,605
I get you and agree. I still wonder if voters realized "we're going to make schools safe" meant "we're going to make schools safe by taking your guns"? Or something along those lines.
 






justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
5,594
I get you and agree. I still wonder if voters realized "we're going to make schools safe" meant "we're going to make schools safe by taking your guns"? Or something along those lines.
Idk. It would have to be looked at. Or a Virginian would need to weigh in... where is @Loki ?

it doesn’t seem like this was a fly under the radar move but I could be wrong.
 






Lurking009

Established
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
408
If there was a proven track record of people using stilettos to kill people. Ok. That would be a conversation we needed to have. If it was decided that stilettos werent worth the risk I wouldn’t cry about it. Your right no one needs them.

I’m not out there advocating to ban assault weapons. But if that’s whats decided I’m not going to cry about it either.

You rant on about freedom here but I’ve seen you advocate taking other freedoms away from people elsewhere. You can’t have it both ways.

There’s also a thing called state rights. And if the majority of Virginians decided this was what was right for them then they are constitutionally within their rights to do so.
As always, you are amusing.
 






Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
1,018
Civil wars aren't fought by lazy boomers on their recliners. They're fought primarily by younger, unhappy males. Which is an ever increasing demographic.
Correct. But those younger, unhappy males have to be willing to die for a cause. More importantly, they have to be willing to kill for a cause. That bit is a lot harder for the average person.

I also don't think you understand how war actually works. A bunch of angry young white dudes aren't going to be able to beat Uncle Sam. Will you be willing to work with revolutionary communists? How about Islamic extremists? Mexican drug cartels? An honest to God revolution, to succeed, is going to have you make strange bedfellows.


It is unlikely but having an armed populace takes out the possibility all together. You ignore that portions of LE and the military would defect from the government. We see in Virginia numerous rural counties who have said they would ignore the gun laws passed at the state levels.
I'm not ignoring that there would be defectors in the military and law enforcement... But I wouldn't count on enough to actually matter. If cops have to choose between the State and civilians, as a whole, they almost always choose the State. Military is the same way. There's not going to be many people who bite the hands that feed them.

Ignoring laws is one thing. Siding with the populous in a rebellion? That's another story.

I'm a fit and strong guy, so heavier ammo isn't a concern.
Being fit and strong doesn't have much to do with has nothing to do with. How many rounds do you intend to carry? Real war requires a lot of bullets and if you're fighting guerilla warfare, you're going to be moving around a lot... There's no guarantee your safehouses won't get compromised, etc.

There is no way I'm choosing a pistol over an AR for defense. Possibly a shotgun for home defense, but that depends on the home and if it's a rural are where stopping power over range might be important. The bottomline is an AR has the most versatile.
The only people who think ARs are good for home defense are people who want to sell you ARs. I haven't spoken to any serious gun enthusiast or shooter who thinks they are. There isn't a self-defense situation where a shotgun isn't more efficient.

And again... "Stopping power" isn't as important as you think, rather, smaller calibers have sufficient stopping power against most targets. The only edge rifles have are range and against multiple targets.

Everything you're saying backs up why this ban is completely ridiculous to begin with. In a mass shooting against unarmed people in a room, a pistol is going to do the same amount of damage as an AR. The only reason to ban ARs is to disarm the people in a potential government conflict and/or a first step to total removal of all firearms.
I'm not arguing with you there. I don't think ARs should be banned. I'd be a pretty awful anarchist if I believed in giving the state more power. But an AR ban isn't going to stop a revolution and an AR ban isn't something worth starting a revolution for. And you're also still greatly underestimating how effective it would be against drones and tanks.
 






Top