If they ban the AR15? When will that go into affect?

[kidoggy]

i do agree it was about much more than slavery, I believe you are correct with that statement.

I'M GLAD YOU CAN GET PAST the idea of racism in what I am saying(most cannot do so).

history has been written to show slavery as the main cause of the war when in reality it was more of a means to help win the war.something to tug on the heartstrings, so to speak. those who do not agree love to cry out racism. they did it then and they do it now.
if you really look at history it becomes clear that the liberal ideology has always used the same tactics to get what they want. nothing they do is new. why? because it works for them.

problem is, in each and every instance , once they achieve their goals , the society ultimately crumbles

 

[ivorytip]

i must add, however, that slavery was a very evil practice that needed to be ended. I do think the civil war helped with that regardless of if that was the real intentions or not. you have to wonder what things would be like now if the south won. ... but back to the AR/15.... what should I get? I want one I can hunt with if needed. I have never been a fan of the AR, I think they are a pointless gun expect for defense purposes, sadly, that's where we are now. now im in the market.

 

[kidoggy]

i must add, however, that slavery was a very evil practice that needed to be ended. I do think the civil war helped with that regardless of if that was the real intentions or not. you have to wonder what things would be like now if the south won. ... but back to the AR/15.... what should I get? I want one I can hunt with if needed. I have never been a fan of the AR, I think they are a pointless gun expect for defense purposes, sadly, that's where we are now. now im in the market.

I do agree with you ,as I believe most rational folks would, slavery was wrong. and probably the abolishment of it was the one good thing that came of that war. if you really believe in " all men have the right to life ,liberty and the pursuit of happiness(property) then it is illogical to believe anything else.
however, I believe that with the inventions of modern technology, slavery in the united states would soon have died out regardless. IT IS ALSO MY OPINION (opinion only so take with a grain of salt) that without government involvement, which continually fans the flames of racism, in order to keep us divided and therefore weaker, there would be much less hatred among the races today.




personaly ,I have zero interest in owning an ar-15. but I support the 2nd AND believe the right to own one SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ON, period. no exceptions.
that said , if someone committs a crime with one ,they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
I believe , criminals should be punished , not law abiding citizens. YOU SIMPLY CANNOT PASS LAWS TO PREVENT WHAT SOMEONE MIGHT DO.
we do not need more laws to prevent crime. they do not work anyhow.
laws do not prevent crime, punishing criminal behavior does.
for instance , last time I heard , murder , was against the law,yet, that wackjob down in orlando did it anyhow. if he was willing to commit murder, arguably one of the most heinous of all criminal acts, is it reasonable to think he would honor a gun law? I THINK NOT.

 

[Tim McCoy]

Talk about a thread veering all over... Was not going to get involved, but the more I thought about the position just espoused here, I decided I would not let my silence be construed as some sort of agreement. As I do not remotely agree the wrong side won. It is actually a repulsive thought to me.

Scholars still debate the actual cause (s) of the civil war. Most agree there were several. Certainly slavery and federal vs states power are often mentioned. I'm no fan of excess Fed power, but I am less a fan of slavery and it's associated atrocities. Anyone that suggests the wrong side won is parsing the issue to the extreme with a sole focus on fed control, and is essentially agreeing states could maintain slavery. Not a position that is defensible to me. I'm glad the right side won.

You are entitled to your own opinion, as am I, I simply find yours repugnant on several levels Kidoggy.

As far as an AR Ivory, almost too many choices. In my view, you either go with a decent Mil Spec DI version, learn to clean and lube it, which when done correctly gives you a very reliable weapon, or pick one of the proprietary piston guns and hope if a part breaks they are available. An argument can be made an AK platform has the best of both, clean running piston and parts availability. The AK-74's in 5.45 are another viable option if you prefer a smaller caliber.

Myself, I went with an AK-47 about 12 years ago, I goof off a bunch in the SE OR hi desert with my boys, it's dusty and gritty, so wanted to not have to worry about a DI AR I would probably need to clean more often because everyone I've been around needed to be run wet (oiled) to run best. Piston AR's are much more available now, but almost all are proprietary, so were I to get another, it may very well be the AK-74.

Was best for me, but not for everyone. Should I have to hunt with it, deadly to about 150, maybe a little further, with favored ammo on pie plates. Accuracy is not it's calling card. I do not use it for home defense or hunting, only to stop mass zombie attacks. We bought it for fun actually. Were hunting or home defense on my list, would have gone with the AR as they are very sub 1 moa capable and easier to configure for home defense IMO.

 

[kidoggy]

Talk about a thread veering all over... Was not going to get involved, but the more I thought about the position just espoused here, I decided I would not let my silence be construed as some sort of agreement. As I do not remotely agree the wrong side won. It is actually a repulsive thought to me.

Scholars still debate the actual cause (s) of the civil war. Most agree there were several. Certainly slavery and federal vs states power are often mentioned. I'm no fan of excess Fed power, but I am less a fan of slavery and it's associated atrocities. Anyone that suggests the wrong side won is parsing the issue to the extreme with a sole focus on fed control, and is essentially agreeing states could maintain slavery. Not a position that is defensible to me. I'm glad the right side won.

You are entitled to your own opinion, as am I, I simply find yours repugnant on several levels Kidoggy.


it's not uncommon on a forum if a thread continues long enough to have several conversations going at once, but the thread generally circles back to topic.


that's the great thing about this nation , we still have the right to agree to disagree and move on.

I am curious though, to what in particular ,do you find repugnant ,other then my ,the wrong side won comment. if you read carefully ,I denounced slavery so what exactly, is offensive to you.

 

[Tim McCoy]

Won't engage in endless point counter point. I gave the reason in my reply, but will restate here once, had the south won, slavery would have continued longer. Repugnant and indefensible IMO. Your initial remark said you did not care about slavery, in a later remark you denounced it, was typing my reply as you added that. Denouncing slavery while clinging to a wrong side won opinion rings hollow at best, the denouncement does not change my opinion in the least as the thought the wrong side won is repugnant to me. You can't have it both ways.

There are ways to frame your argument that acknowledge both the fact the right side won because it ended slavery (a very good thing) and it may have led to even more federal power (not always a good thing). Not making that argument, but one could if they cared to without the continuation of slavery being a consequence of the argument being advanced.

 

[kidoggy]

Won't engage in endless point counter point. I gave the reason in my reply, but will restate here once, had the south won, slavery would have continued longer. Repugnant and indefensible IMO. Your initial remark said you did not care about slavery, in a later remark you denounced it, was typing my reply as you added that. Denouncing slavery while clinging to a wrong side won opinion rings hollow at best, the denouncement does not change my opinion in the least as the thought the wrong side won is repugnant to me. You can't have it both ways.

There are ways to frame your argument that acknowledge both the fact the right side won because it ended slavery (a very good thing) and it may have led to even more federal power (not always a good thing). Not making that argument, but one could if they cared to without the continuation of slavery being a consequence of the argument being advanced.

hmm.. ok, so it is merely that you can't get past the racism aspect and put that on a shelf to discuss the important aspect of the war. like I said ,most can't.


at least we can still agree to disagree.

 

[Tim McCoy]

You are incorrect in your assumption about me. Slavery is the practise of owning slaves. It is irrespective of race, many different races have been on both sides. In the USA, sure it was one way, but the colors involved are not any part of my argument. It is the practise of slavery I find repulsive, any time any where by any race to the same race or a different race. You seem to want to turn it to racism, I don't, racism is a different issue, each can exist together or either apart, both equally repugnant on many levels, but slavery is arguably worse to most. I detest racism in all of it's forms as well, but it is not part of my argument in this case.

Ergo I'd never agree to look past slavery to make a very narrow federal power argument. Sadly, there are many better federal power examples one could use with little looking needed, the civil war is a poor one due to it's serving a very good purpose in ending slavery. You might want to examine why such a narrow and flawed argument is not agreed to by most...

Make it all you want, your right to make it. Just know if your cause is to sway opinions against about federal control, using the civil war like you are doing, you are very unlikely to be taken seriously by most. Despite how much many agree on the federal issue, telling someone to set aside slavery is a poor tactic, if you actually want to be taken seriously by most.

I'm done talking to you about this. I have more productive things to do today, going to mow my lawn and chase a few grandkids around later with nerf guns.

 

[kidoggy]

You are incorrect in your assumption about me. Slavery is the practise of owning slaves. It is irrespective of race, many different races have been on both sides. In the USA, sure it was one way, but the colors involved are not any part of my argument. It is the practise of slavery I find repulsive, any time any where by any race to the same race or a different race. You seem to want to turn it to racism, I don't, racism is a different issue, each can exist together or either apart, both equally repugnant on many levels, but slavery is arguably worse to most. I detest racism in all of it's forms as well, but it is not part of my argument in this case.




Ergo I'd never agree to look past slavery to make a very narrow federal power argument. Sadly, there are many better federal power examples one could use with little looking needed, the civil war is a poor one due to it's serving a very good purpose in ending slavery. You might want to examine why such a narrow and flawed argument is not agreed to by most...

Make it all you want, your right to make it. Just know if your cause is to sway opinions against about federal control, using the civil war like you are doing, you are very unlikely to be taken seriously by most. Despite how much many agree on the federal issue, telling someone to set aside slavery is a poor tactic, if you actually want to be taken seriously by most.

I'm done talking to you about this. I have more productive things to do today, going to mow my lawn and chase a few grandkids around later with nerf guns.

it seems to me we don't really disagree on anything but wether or not who won the war was good or bad.(and the fact you find me repugnant while I see myself as a delight.)
I care nothing about the color of ones skin, it seems you don't either .
only reason I brought civil war into the conversation was because MMan WAS SPEAKING OF REValution, and I merely stated we already had it and lost. then was asked to expand on my meaning. which is when I stated ,I could care less about the slavery aspect of the war.

 

[Vikingload]

Because they're hypocrites, they live in bubbles and they're simple and irrational.

They don't really care about reducing the number of deaths, if they did, they'd try to ban cars, since as many or more people are killed in automobile accidents as are killed with guns every year.

They reason they don't advocate for the banning of cars is because they own three and use them everyday and their life would be greatly burdened by the banning of cars.

On the other hand, most of them don't own guns and don't care about guns and as a consequence they see no use for guns and if they don't have a use for a gun, then they don't see why anybody else has a use for a gun.

They think that if there were no guns, then nobody would be killed by guns, and since they have no use for a gun then guns should be banned so nobody gets killed.

If you ignore reality and the hypocrisy, it all makes sense.

I agree and to my friends that think this way I just remind them of Chicago. Seems like the gun control policies there are working out for them............


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Musket Man]

i must add, however, that slavery was a very evil practice that needed to be ended. I do think the civil war helped with that regardless of if that was the real intentions or not. you have to wonder what things would be like now if the south won. ... but back to the AR/15.... what should I get? I want one I can hunt with if needed. I have never been a fan of the AR, I think they are a pointless gun expect for defense purposes, sadly, that's where we are now. now im in the market.

I wish the south had won. I would like to see what it would be like now. Ending slavery was not the best thing for many slaves. You hear about the bad slave owners but not the good ones. Many of them didnt want to be freed and didnt know what to do when they were freed. If the AR-15 is banned there will be another civil war!

If you want an AR build 1, dont buy it. Somany options to fit your needs and budget. Its the best thing about AR's lol

 

[velvetfvr]

i do agree it was about much more than slavery, I believe you are correct with that statement.

Civil war wasn't about slavery. It later turned to that later but it never started because of slavery.