Any National Rifle Association members in the house?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,534
911
126
Originally posted by: gar3555
See once again, my opinion is wrong just because it doesn't match yours, and just because I believe some guns to be unnecessary, I am wrong, I never said that they shouldn't be allowed to have them because they should.

No, but you implied it.

"That being said, there is no reason the average person should own anything like that AR that DMT has pictured, you can't hunt anything with it. It's just not necessary. "
 

gar3555

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
3,510
0
0
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: gar3555
See once again, my opinion is wrong just because it doesn't match yours, and just because I believe some guns to be unnecessary, I am wrong, I never said that they shouldn't be allowed to have them because they should.

Oh but you did say that.

"That being said, there is no reason the average person should own anything like that AR that DMT has pictured, you can't hunt anything with it. It's just not necessary. "


I believe you have should have the right, that doesn't mean you need one. Maybe a hunter who safaris in Africa, would have the reason to own one, or a big game hunter in Alaska, but the average joe firearm doesn't need one.
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,534
911
126
Originally posted by: gar3555
I believe you have should have the right, that doesn't mean you need one. Maybe a hunter who safaris in Africa, would have the reason to own one, or a big game hunter in Alaska, but the average joe firearm doesn't need one.

Actually, the AR would be completely useless for hunting big game in Africa. Might as well hunt big game with a 9mm handgun.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: preslove
I would never trust the opinion of anyone (concerning politics) who boiled political theory down to communism and fascism. Populism and Progressivism are the main forces in American politics because they were the domestic, American, Red-White-and-Blue reactions to the rise of Modernity. Until there is a huge shakeup in modern America we will be using them as our key guides. They share similarities with European developments, but also have HUGE differences. The closest we ever came to Fascism was during the National Recovery Administration (NRA ;)) of the "first new deal" of FDR. IT FAILED! Why? It probably has something to do with American individualism.
I did not boil down all political theory into communism and fascism. In fact, I said exactly the opposite.

OTOH, Authoritarianism is Authoritarianism. If you think that government is the cure for all that ails you, if your first reaction a an issue is "There oughta be a law!", if you think the solution to the "crime problem" is to take the guns from law-abiding citizens, then that is what you are.

And while I agree with that Populism and Progressivism are hugely important in American politics (at least from an economic standpoint), your political theory fails to address many key developments in American politics. Like, for example, how the entire South switched its vote from the Democrat to Republican parties in 1980. Or (as another example) how the hero of Populism for the Democratic party, William Jennings Bryan, was an early founder of Christian Fundamentalism in America.
 

gar3555

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
3,510
0
0
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: gar3555
I believe you have should have the right, that doesn't mean you need one. Maybe a hunter who safaris in Africa, would have the reason to own one, or a big game hunter in Alaska, but the average joe firearm doesn't need one.

Actually, the AR would be completely useless for hunting big game in Africa. Might as well hunt big game with a 9mm handgun.

It was just a suggestion, I know that an AR is basically just a varmint gun, but I was trying to think of someone with the need to actually use it...I hear there are things called Hyenas in Africa, and actually I said big game in Alaska...but you couldn't really bring down a bull moose with one very easy.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
47,997
37,170
136
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.
 

Hecubus2000

Senior member
Dec 1, 2000
674
0
0
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: gar3555
You are a perfect example of why gun rights are jeopardy in this country. I hear the same thing from many hunters.

I?ll be sure to speak up for you when they come for your deer rifles, oops I mean ?high powered sniper rifle?.

why am I the reason that gun rights are in jeopardy, I am for the right to bear arms, I don't have to be a member of the NRA to support that do I?

Because you would be willing to sell out the rights of other gun owners just because you think certain firearms are not "necessary".

:thumbsup:

I don't care if you are an NRA member or not.

 

gar3555

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
3,510
0
0
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.


I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.
I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.
Private gun ownership does have a purpose. It lowers crime, increases security, and keeps the government in check.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: preslove
I would never trust the opinion of anyone (concerning politics) who boiled political theory down to communism and fascism. Populism and Progressivism are the main forces in American politics because they were the domestic, American, Red-White-and-Blue reactions to the rise of Modernity. Until there is a huge shakeup in modern America we will be using them as our key guides. They share similarities with European developments, but also have HUGE differences. The closest we ever came to Fascism was during the National Recovery Administration (NRA ;)) of the "first new deal" of FDR. IT FAILED! Why? It probably has something to do with American individualism.
I did not boil down all political theory into communism and fascism. In fact, I said exactly the opposite.

Uhmmm... yes you did. Using the "=" sign = boiling down.

Originally posted by: Vic

Classical Liberal = Jeffersonian Democrat = modern Libertarian

Modern Liberal Left in the US today = Communist
If we followed your hyperbole to its logical conclusion, then:

Modern Conservative Right in US today = Fascist[/quote]
And I would agree with that. They are Authoritarian Corporatists, aka Fascists.[/quote]

OTOH, Authoritarianism is Authoritarianism. If you think that government is they cure to all that ail you, if your first reaction a an issue is "There oughta be a law!", then that is what you are.
That's not Authoritarianism. Authoritarianism is TOP --> Down. If the "you" in that example is an average joe then it is not Authoritarianism, but normal democratic response.

An ok synopsis on it.
"The term authoritarian is used to describe an organization or a state which enforces strong and sometimes oppressive measures against the population, generally without attempts at gaining the consent of the population.

In an authoritarian state, citizens are subject to state authority in many aspects of their lives, including many that other political philosophies would see as matters of personal choice.
There are, however, various degrees of authoritarianism; and even democratic countries have shown inclinations to authoritarianism in some respects....

As an example of the last case, modern democracies often once enforced laws that would be nowadays considered abusive and authoritarian: for instance, countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom, until recently, enforced sodomy laws imposing the moral and religious values of the majority over matters of private life.

And while I agree with that Populism and Progressivism are hugely important in American politics, your political theory fails to address many key developments in American politics. Like, for example, how the entire South switched its vote from the Democrat to Republican parties in 1980. Or (as another example) how the hero of Populism for the Democratic party, William Jennings Bryan, was an early founder of Christian Fundamentalism in America.

Those are both examples of POPULISM.
 

gar3555

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
3,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.
I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.
Private gun ownership does have a purpose. It lowers crime, increases security, and keeps the government in check.

If you need an AR to protect your home, then you must live in a really rough neighborhood. Most any handgun will protect a home, and be easier to access in times of need.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
47,997
37,170
136
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.


I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.

I guess I'm older fashoned:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

 

Fingers

Platinum Member
Sep 4, 2000
2,188
0
0
Originally posted by: gar3555
I'm not in the NRA and neither are any of my roommates, but we love guns, and hunting. we have two deer heads, soon to be three in our living room, as well as 5 more skulls in our garage. We hunt all the time, Deer, Turkeys, pheasants, doves, and anything else that moves basically ;). That being said, there is no reason the average person should own anything like that AR that DMT has pictured, you can't hunt anything with it. It's just not necessary. ~ed: also we have enough guns and ammo in our house to hold our own if things go down :)

They are good for entertainment value at the range and are quite effetive as varmint and preditor rifles.
 

gar3555

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
3,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Fingers
Originally posted by: gar3555
I'm not in the NRA and neither are any of my roommates, but we love guns, and hunting. we have two deer heads, soon to be three in our living room, as well as 5 more skulls in our garage. We hunt all the time, Deer, Turkeys, pheasants, doves, and anything else that moves basically ;). That being said, there is no reason the average person should own anything like that AR that DMT has pictured, you can't hunt anything with it. It's just not necessary. ~ed: also we have enough guns and ammo in our house to hold our own if things go down :)

They are good for entertainment value at the range and are quite effetive as varmint and preditor rifles.


That is true, it is fun to watch a coyote squirm when you blow his backside out with an AR at 100+ yds, but thats an expensive fun...and I can think of other things that bring me as much joy at a fraction of the cost.
 

gar3555

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
3,510
0
0
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.


I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.

I guess I'm older fashoned:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"


Then how come I can't own a 120mm gun because that would make me happy.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.
I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.
Private gun ownership does have a purpose. It lowers crime, increases security, and keeps the government in check.
If you need an AR to protect your home, then you must live in a really rough neighborhood. Most any handgun will protect a home, and be easier to access in times of need.
The handgun is to protect your house from crime, the AR is to protect your nation from foreign and domestic threats to your freedom. I fail to see the lack of need.
 

gar3555

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
3,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.
I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.
Private gun ownership does have a purpose. It lowers crime, increases security, and keeps the government in check.
If you need an AR to protect your home, then you must live in a really rough neighborhood. Most any handgun will protect a home, and be easier to access in times of need.
The handgun is to protect your house from crime, the AR is to protect your nation from foreign and domestic threats to your freedom. I fail to see the lack of need.


True, at anytime the king of England could walk into your house and slap you around like he owned the place...better get the AR loaded.

I'm not real worried about a foreign invasion right now, and I don't feel the need to start planting land mines in the front yard.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: preslove
That's not Authoritarianism. Authoritarianism is TOP --> Down. If the "you" in that example is an average joe then it is not Authoritarianism, but normal democratic response.

An ok synopsis on it.
"The term authoritarian is used to describe an organization or a state which enforces strong and sometimes oppressive measures against the population, generally without attempts at gaining the consent of the population.

In an authoritarian state, citizens are subject to state authority in many aspects of their lives, including many that other political philosophies would see as matters of personal choice.
There are, however, various degrees of authoritarianism; and even democratic countries have shown inclinations to authoritarianism in some respects....

As an example of the last case, modern democracies often once enforced laws that would be nowadays considered abusive and authoritarian: for instance, countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom, until recently, enforced sodomy laws imposing the moral and religious values of the majority over matters of private life.
Your argument suffers from the false belief that democracy can never be tyrannical.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
47,997
37,170
136
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.


I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.

I guess I'm older fashoned:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Then how come I can't own a 120mm gun because that would make me happy.

Ah yes, here we go again.

I have some of these answers saved to prevent more wear on my keyboard

To those who would take the 2nd to an illogical extreme; In Colonial times "arms" meant weapons that could be carried. This included knives, swords, rifles and pistols. Dictionaries of the time had a separate definition for "ordinance" (as it was spelled then) meaning cannon. Any hand held, non-ordnance type weapons, are theoretically constitutionally protected. Obviously nuclear weapons, tanks, rockets, fighter planes, and submarines are not.

Credit to Amused.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.
I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.
Private gun ownership does have a purpose. It lowers crime, increases security, and keeps the government in check.
If you need an AR to protect your home, then you must live in a really rough neighborhood. Most any handgun will protect a home, and be easier to access in times of need.
The handgun is to protect your house from crime, the AR is to protect your nation from foreign and domestic threats to your freedom. I fail to see the lack of need.
True, at anytime the king of England could walk into your house and slap you around like he owned the place...better get the AR loaded.

I'm not real worried about a foreign invasion right now, and I don't feel the need to start planting land mines in the front yard.
:roll:
Just who the fsck are you to determine the "needs" of other people?
 

gar3555

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
3,510
0
0
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.


I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.

I guess I'm older fashoned:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Then how come I can't own a 120mm gun because that would make me happy.

Ah yes, here we go again.

I have some of these answers saved to prevent more wear on my keyboard

To those who would take the 2nd to an illogical extreme; In Colonial times "arms" meant weapons that could be carried. This included knives, swords, rifles and pistols. Dictionaries of the time had a separate definition for "ordinance" (as it was spelled then) meaning cannon. Any hand held, non-ordnance type weapons, are theoretically constitutionally protected. Obviously nuclear weapons, tanks, rockets, fighter planes, and submarines are not.

Credit to Amused.


so hand held is your definition....what about an RPG?
 

gar3555

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
3,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: K1052
We don't have to justify it on "need" nor do you.
The "gun control" lobby has managed to convince you that we should have to.
I guess I'm old fashioned...and I believe everything should have a purpose, and you should buy something if you need it.
Private gun ownership does have a purpose. It lowers crime, increases security, and keeps the government in check.
If you need an AR to protect your home, then you must live in a really rough neighborhood. Most any handgun will protect a home, and be easier to access in times of need.
The handgun is to protect your house from crime, the AR is to protect your nation from foreign and domestic threats to your freedom. I fail to see the lack of need.
True, at anytime the king of England could walk into your house and slap you around like he owned the place...better get the AR loaded.

I'm not real worried about a foreign invasion right now, and I don't feel the need to start planting land mines in the front yard.
:roll:
Just who the fsck are you to determine the "needs" of other people?

I'm not the one to determine there needs, people should be able to do that on there own. I just don't see too many people needing that kind of firepower, but you can be your own judge.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Vic
the AR is to protect your nation from foreign and domestic threats to your freedom. I fail to see the lack of need.
The AR is to protect you from other assholes that own guns. With the proliferation of guns in todays society it's almost a must that you should own one just to protect yourself from Joe Gungho down the street with his arsenal.

If I lived by high strung gun nut I'd feel the need to own a gun because of the odds that one day he'll go off his rocker and start shooting up the nieghborhood. An AR would work just fine in a case like that.

 

Fingers

Platinum Member
Sep 4, 2000
2,188
0
0
Originally posted by: gar3555
Originally posted by: Fingers
Originally posted by: gar3555
I'm not in the NRA and neither are any of my roommates, but we love guns, and hunting. we have two deer heads, soon to be three in our living room, as well as 5 more skulls in our garage. We hunt all the time, Deer, Turkeys, pheasants, doves, and anything else that moves basically ;). That being said, there is no reason the average person should own anything like that AR that DMT has pictured, you can't hunt anything with it. It's just not necessary. ~ed: also we have enough guns and ammo in our house to hold our own if things go down :)

They are good for entertainment value at the range and are quite effetive as varmint and preditor rifles.


That is true, it is fun to watch a coyote squirm when you blow his backside out with an AR at 100+ yds, but thats an expensive fun...and I can think of other things that bring me as much joy at a fraction of the cost.


just thought of a few other features:

After the initial cost the ammo is dirt cheap and you can easily modify it to .308 or .50 beowolf, but the latter kinda hinders the advantage of cheap ammo.

Also for the lady shooters and kids recoil is next to nothing.