https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/dick...ores-1.3822124
Printable View
I fail to see why.
Explain to me what is the difference between the AR and say mini ranch rifle both are semi both shoot 223, does the plastic make the gun more deadly?
If I take my SKS and replace the wooden stock with a military stock has the gun become more dangerous?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Well,that's one way to keep AR platform rifles out of the hands of those that shouldn't have them........stop selling them. What about the 5 million already in circulation,though? This is more of a corporate PR move by getting out in front of the coming shyte storm,but, at least,it's someone doing something as opposed to everyone doing nothing.
Maybe what is dangerous, is in the mind set of someone who wants the most dangerous looking gun, even though they all can kill. The better question would be , why do people want that particular gun, if they all kill equally? Sorry but take out the number one reason given, because I want one, , look deep within yourself and answer honestly, what is the real reason?
A pistol grip is more ergonomic than a conventional grip.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
I'm sure you have your own answer to that other than the stock one we hear all the time of "I need it for home security" which to me is ridiculous,but,then again,I don't live in America where armed intruders enter dwellings at all hours of the day and night to rob,rape and murder. Man,what a way to live.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Because it was a military rifle and was used in Vietnam. They all presume if it was good enough for the military you gotta have it. It was primarily used as a casualty producing weapon versus a killing weapon but would do both depending on where you were hit. With the 7.62 MR14 if you were hit in the shoulder the projectile would pass right through and that person could get back to a safe area on his own. With the AR15 if a person was hit in the shoulder the projectile would rotate, twist and turn and tear the shoulder right off needing two people to get that person to a medic...thus taking two additional people off of the front line... Plus the ammo didn't weigh as much, meaning you could carry more. Nothing more than a me too weapon for those that gotta have one.
They want it because it looks meaner and deadlier, than other guns, even though all guns kill. They want to be the bad, meanest looking dude on the range.
nothing but a PR stunt to try and increase sales from left leaning people who don't shop there anyways, dicks will be bankrupt in a few years regardless, they should stick to selling tennis shoes...
I see Norway has decided to bad semi's by 2021...better not let the Liberals see them doing that, or guys will have to learn to use bolt actions again :)
Quote:
Already known for its tough gun control laws, Norway is reportedly taking steps to further tighten its firearm legislation. Quoting a Norwegian lawmaker, AFP reported Tuesday that the Scandinavian nation is planning to ban semi-automatic weapons by 2021 — a year that also marks the 10-year anniversary of the 2011 mass shooting on Norway’s Utoya island.
Peter Frolich, a member of parliament who sits on the judicial affairs committee, told AFP that “it has become clear that there is a parliamentary majority in favor of” the ban, which was first proposed last year by the country’s minority right-wing government.
“Semi-automatic weapons will therefore be banned in Norway,” Frolich said. AFP noted that the law would go into effect in 2021.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/n...b0e6a523029513
Notice it was proposed by a right wing government, so quit saying it is only the left that want to control guns.
Low levels of gun violence yet they still want to ban semi's. This makes zero sense. There isn't a problem with gun violence in Norway.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
There's nothing common sense about it it's jumping the gun based on emotion. One gun is no more deadly than any other
You are right, they are not, but if you wanted to kill more things faster, would you pick up a single shot gun, or a semi.?
This is why the army has decided to save money by re-equipping with bolt-action single-shot .22 LR rifles. No gun is deadlier.Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchhunter
As to the move by Dick's: they are protecting themselves from the ruinous reputational hit they would take if they sold the gun to the next mass shooter. Having sold a gun to the Parkland shooter is a near miss and they know it. Since hunting is not their core business, I expect they are ready to exit the gun business entirely if faced with a boycott.
Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk
For the American dilemma with mass school shootings the question is where to draw a stop.Lets say Trump decides to arm teachers, what would they need to defend the kids.A 40 cal glock with 15 round clip is really not a match for a shooter with a fully auto AR 15. The NRA wants to arm everybody as a deterrent for would be robbers,rapists,shooters. Well in order to be not out gunned everybody would need a mass shooters choice of gun.Where would the madness end?Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
Australia had the same problem and got the job done. America has a unique challenge with their constitution but they look really stupid right now Worldwide
when they are going off the wall about Muslims,building walls to keep out Mexicans bad guys and workers ,drone killing possible terrorists all over the globe.
BUT CANNOT EVEN DEFEND THE LIVES OF ORDINARY SCHOOL CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY FROM ATTACKS FROM FELLOW AMERICANS.
Even Trump seems to be prepared to take on the NRA. Trump isn't as dependant on NRA money as many Republicans would be.
It is a wonder piece of modern technology that is a pleasure to shoot, and can more personalized and customized then a car.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
The AR15 has never been used in Military service...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo D
You need to read a little more and stop listening to the guy leading the brown shirts...
When Eugene M.Stoner designed the original M-16 for the US Army in Viet Nam,I'll bet a week's pay he never dreamed they or the derivitives would ever be in civilian hands.
In name only. In Norway if you believe in a free market economy you are considered right wing. This particular "right wing" party would actually be considered a a social liberal party by any metric used in North America as they are firm supporters of the welfare state.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
That's very true....being 'right winged' in Norway means refusing to wear birkenstocks clogs...LOL...Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472
AMEN...Quote:
Originally Posted by kokes
AMEN...Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowwalker
GilroyQuote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Please don't take this the wrong way
1) do you own guns?
2) why?
Yup.Quote:
Originally Posted by standup
I have been withholding comments but I wonder the same thing....
Fact: the AR-15, although not initially adopted by the US Army, was designed to meet an Army requirement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowwalker
Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk
Fudds galore.
The ArmaLite AR-15 was a select-fire, air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed assault rifle manufactured in the United States between 1959 and 1964. Designed by American gun manufacturer ArmaLite in 1956, it was based on its AR-10 rifle. The ArmaLite AR-15 was designed to be a lightweight assault rifle and to fire a new high-velocity, lightweight, small-caliber cartridge to allow the infantrymen to carry more ammunition.[4] The rifle was not available for civilian use.[citation needed]Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowwalker
In 1959, ArmaLite sold its rights to the AR-10 and AR-15 to Colt due to financial difficulties.[5] After modifications (most notably, the charging handle was re-located from under the carrying handle like AR-10 to the rear of the receiver),[6] Colt rebranded it the Colt ArmaLite AR-15. Colt marketed the redesigned rifle to various military services around the world and it was subsequently adopted by the United States military as the M16 Rifle, which went into production in March 1964.[4][7] Colt continued to use the AR-15 trademark for its line of semi-automatic-only rifles marketed to civilian and law-enforcement customers, known as Colt AR-15. The Armalite AR-15 is the parent of a variety of Colt AR-15 & M16 rifle variants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-15
FB good first post. Why did you pick this thread, at this time, to speak up?
You just ragged on a fellow for using wiki as a source and praise this guy?
Interesting.
Said it was a good first post, I did not say it was correct.
Lol okay!
So I have to ask - why was it good?
Did it support your viewpoint?
1) Yes I own guns.Quote:
Originally Posted by standup
2) I use them to try and harvest large game and small game.
Why? Well for the first post on a new site, it was not 'nice fish', 'good shot', but showed he had read and put some thought into, and provided some insight into the conversation. Now I will ask you, 'what is my viewpoint' ?
Because facts matter. To incorrectly state something that is so easily verifiable and then follow it with the implication that failure to believe it was akin to fascism warranted a response.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
That is something you need to ask yourself while looking in the mirror.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
FB,I agree . I believe in facts not rhetoric.
I appreciate the humility implied by the word "try." :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
BJ, I know if you love your stuff more than people, and consider it more important than any person who would try to take it, you have gotten your priorities mixed up along the way.
Great first post,well done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeburn
I think if you presume/pretend to know a criminals mind or intentions while they are committing an illegal act, it may one day prove fatal to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Your hindsight is certainly 20/20 though.
So , in your home, you would automatically confront someone with your gun, sight unseen, upon hearing a noise or calling out and not getting the appropriate response? Would you go remove your gun from 'safe storage', before searching the house-garage-shed? Your guns are safely stored in the basement, the noise is the kitchen window being forced open, your upstairs in your bedroom, gun under the bed? Myself, I have a few Louisville Sluggers strategically placed around the house, just in case a baseball game breaks out. I was informed by a lawyer once, that if you grab a bat out of your car during an altercation, you had better have a ball and glove in there as well.
Big Jack,Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Jack
I think after 32 years downtown as an armed officer and 2 years back home as a basically unarmed officer I can tell you something about criminal minds.
Firstly most criminals are cowards and they are looking for soft targets.Bad guys who break into houses do so mostly in daylight hours in unoccupied homes.
they don,t go near homes with large dogs behind the doors.Most criminals that have a choice will run,especially if an officer is involved.
Now there are the small minority who will resort to violence right off the bat, guys drugged up or intoxicated and those prone to armed hold up,s.Most all of us as civilians do not meet these guys unless we live in high crime urban area,s.Criminals are NOT STUPID, using violence gets you hard time so what is the point.
There are very few citizens killed by criminals in the course of committing an illegal act.Most criminals are injured or killed by other criminals in my experience.
If criminals are looking for soft targets, why are you advocating the banning of certain firearms for the civilian use in your gun control posts. In essence you are making targets softer which according to you, gives the criminals more targets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Your lawyer friend gave you excellent advice. Personally,I'd rather use a Louisville Slugger instead of a firearm,anyway. I was always more afraid of the "intruder" being one of the kids coming in late trying to be "quiet".Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Um-m-m,what's a FUDD?Quote:
Originally Posted by canthitathing
Armed robbers would be the most dangerous type of criminal a citizen would have to face and for the majority of times our armed and trained police do a good job.Armed citizen,s would present more of a danger to themselves and other members of the public it they took on a armed criminal as most of them do not have the training or presence of mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dythbringer
I imagine you being one of those who think we should arm all our school kids with fully auto AR15,s just in case there is a mass shooter.The school kids are all soft targets,the solution is not to arm the whole school or is it in your mind?
Slang term for a "casual" gun owner; eg; a person who typically only owns guns for hunting or shotgun sports and does not truly believe in the true premise of the second amendment. These people also generally treat owners/users of so called "non sporting" firearms like handguns or semiautomatic rifles with unwarranted scorn or contempt.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Thankfully, the Trudeau government has committed to a “fact-based” approach to law-making so confidence is high that this will all get worked out.Quote:
Originally Posted by canthitathing
What? "fact based" and "Trudeau government" used in the same sentence? Now,that's a new one and that's funny right there.LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Removed my previous post - I’ll simply say I disagree. We will wind up worse off than ever as a nation.
Your comments are on the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
https://firearmrights.ca/en/no-virtu...ublic-on-guns/Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Canadian Coalition For Firearms Rights has it right at the end of this article,so I guess it must be right,right?
You would be incorrect. I think arming school kids with fully automatic firearms is a terrible idea (the fact the AR-15 is not fully automatic firearm is something you have been told repeatedly but still don't seem to understand). I don't think arming teachers is a good idea either. However, an adult shooter, who has proven themselves to society not to be a danger and who can handle a firearm safely and effectively, should be able to use any semi-automatic firearm for any lawful activity or even in defense if circumstances warrant it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
I am not talking about schools. In your example I quoted, your two examples used someone's home and that is what I am referring to. Schools are the softest of targets but don't receive the number of break-ins that homes do. Perhaps what you should have said was high value soft targets.
I dislike the banhammer for anything. Bringing out the banhammer for the firearm to deal with the issues in the US is dealing with the symptom and not the problem.
I disagree with you that armed citizens are more of a danger to themselves and other members of the public. The police have the police service act to help protect them with their duties. If their job dictates the necessity of a sidearm/rifle discharge to protect the public, the police have legal protection in most circumstances. Armed citizens have no such legal protection so they have to be more cautious if they ever need to protect themselves.
An adult shooter who had proved himself to society not to be a danger and who could handle firearms safely and effectively have been able TIME AND TIME again to obtain guns and kill people,schools,movies,Las Vagas..... I believe a AR 15 can be converted to fully auto by use of a bump stock?
They banned guns in Australia to an extent and seem to have solved their mass shooting problems.It can be done.Have you heard about mass shootings in Scotland since Dunblaine?
Actually you don't need a bump stock with a little practice you can do it with your bare hands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
And what about all the other adult shooters who have never killed people. Why do they never factor into your thinking? You know the massive majority of people who own firearms. The way you always talk, you expect us to off the rails at any time. In fact, since you think firearm owners are untrustworthy, I expect you to go down to your local police station and hand in your firearms for destruction because we can't trust you not to go off the rails.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Bump stock is an after market addition. Using something like that to make a semi-automatic into an automatic is akin to sawing off a shotgun. Legal firearm owners who follow the law wouldn't be doing that.
Sigh. Australia again huh? Still beating that drum. So the Australian public just turned in 57 000 firearms under an amnesty program. Alot of them were pistol grip. Since your premise has always been the banning of those firearms has solved their mass shooting problems, why weren't there any mass shootings with those firearms during the period between 1996 and the amnesty program?
Hey Dyth!
Gilroy-??? just likes to hear himself talk, or see himself in print.
" Has A Narcissist Bent To Be Heard In The Cacophony Of The Media "-- author unknown.
Gilroy did you know that most of Finland, Norway, Switzerland is armed
I bet not many gang bangers turned in there guns. Drug dealers ether.
That dog won't hunt no more,Gilroy. There were no "mass shootings" before the one that precipitated all the draconian gun confiscation and subsequent firearms bans making it a "one of" occurrence that gun control advocates seized on to as an excuse. Stating that all the "new" gun control measures resulted in no more mass shootings is just liberal leftist BS spin with absolutely no basis in fact. As for the Dunblaine incident,it was another "one of" incident. Just because another hasn't happened has ZERO to do with the Scots ill-advised and useless gun control measures,either. To think otherwise is simply delusional.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
No point in getting yur nickers in a twist.Your the one who brought up all about licensed and trained gun owners.They still go off the rails.At least you now admit an AR 15 can be made into a fully auto.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dythbringer
More one liners by the angry little old troll.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
Well that,s nailed it right there.Liberals add up all the so called "one off,s" and come to an honest total. Conservatives keep calling them "one off,s" and continue to stick their collective heads in the sand.That is why America is in such as state and why we are not going there.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
In fact, there were something like 14 mass shootings leading up to the Australian ban.
And before Dunblane, there was Hungerford.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
Gilroy, we all see you as one/both of these, you have proven it over and over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
The Persistent Debate Troll
This type of troll loves a good argument. They can take a great, thoroughly researched and fact-based piece of content, and come at it from all opposing discussion angles to challenge its message. They believe they're right, and everyone else is wrong. You'll often also find them leaving long threads or arguments with other commenters in community comment sections, and they're always determined to have the last word – continuing to comment until that other user gives up.
10
The Show-Off, Know-it-All Or Blabbermouth Troll
A close relative to the persistent debate troll, the show-off or blabbermouth troll is a person who doesn't necessarily like to participate in arguments but does love to share his opinion in extreme detail, even spreading rumors and secrets in some cases. Think of that one family member or friend you know who just loves to hear his own voice. That's the Internet equivalent of the show-off or know-it-all or blabbermouth troll. They love to have long discussions and write lots of paragraphs about whatever they know, whether anyone reads it or not.
Take your pills , and go to bed before they come looking for you again. :)
Yet another thread gone on too long and reduced to bickering.