Yeah I am pretty sure a few radicals with stocked AR15s to stop crazy lefties from causing a coupe and taking over is what is intended. Your idea sounds pretty paranoid. Democrats have been in power at various times, I don't see any repeal of the 2d amendment occurring or Marines marching down K Street taking over.
There was an "assault weapons" ban during the Clinton administration. Sen. Feinstein, among others, has pushed for even more oppressive anti-gun measures. People are not so stupid they can't see what is coming if democrats ever get back in power.
The problem is the understanding of so-called "assault rifles". This class of weapon gets bad press, but the functionality of them isn't really a whole lot more dangerous than any other firearm. For example, a hunting rifle that shoots a .308 caliber bullet is more "high powered" than a typical AR-15 that shoots a .223. But the AR15 just looks scary. And people who don't understand them go "it's a high powered, military assault rifle!" What a load of crap. No, it isn't. Banning high capacity magazines is also stupid. All you have to do is take two low capacity mags, tape them against each other in opposite directions and you can reload in under 2 seconds while firing. The issue isn't the object. It's a complicated issue dealing with society, people and the culture. But no one wants to go after the real solution because that's too challenging.
Was not my intent to get into the topic of the description of the weapons. No one has ever made a compelling argument why you need more firepower than your handgun if the argument is based on personal safety in your house or concealed carry.
You continue to miss the point. No one has to "justify" why they need a certain firearm. It's a Constitutional right to "keep and bear arms." The Supreme Court interpreted that to protect commonly used firearms and those useful for self or home defense. The AR is by far the most widely owned rifle, so by definition it fits within that definition. The onus is on those who would abridge this Constitutional right to offer compelling justification. The fact that you don't like guns and that they can be misused is not enough.
The Constitution does not define and mention which arms and 200 years of Supreme Coourt history and precedent dictates that rights can be defined and limited by the legislature and has been upheld by both conservative and liberal courts.
The Courts have consistently held that legislatures must use the least restrictive means possible when limiting constitutional rights. Whatever, but thanks for illustrating to us again why we need to be buying as many guns and as much ammo as possible.
Yeah I was just pointing out in general that there is no absolute rights so you cannot just say it is your right to have every single type of gun there is. You seem quite paranoid that your guns are going to be taken away and the U.S. government is going to use the military to take over the country and that would be stopped if you and your friends hid in your treehouse with AR15s.
That's fine, we're just discussing. This is a discussion forum. If you're not interested in that, then I apologize for engaging you. Some people prefer rifles because they want to protect their property. It's not limited to merely a house, just because you or I reside in such a situation. As an example. Best for home defense is actually a shotgun, not a handgun. But you are OK with hunting rifles, and a hunting rifle can be just as deadly as an AR15.
Yes, it's that overactive amygdala that conservatives have. It makes you all irrationally paranoid. Conservatives Big on Fear, Brain Study Finds https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...1104/conservatives-big-fear-brain-study-finds