Assault weapons are not protected by the 2nd amendment, court rules
- Thread starter Berniewood Hogan
- Start date
ill
Superstar
The only real flat part of America is Middle America where no one lives. Most of our population runs alongside the Rocky Mountains and the Appalachian Mountains. Soldiers trained in the Sierra Nevada's because its landscape is identical to Afghanistans. Afghan's stood up to two massive superpowers with all of their bombs, airplanes, heavy machinery, etc and they are still fighting 40+ years later. Clearly, superior US military weapons do NOT guarantee victory and "assault" rifles have greatly helped the Afghan people in their resistance.
Berniewood Hogan
IT'S BERNIE SANDERS WITH A STEEL CHAIR!
this derail about Afghanistan
bring up completely different subjects, brehs
No more assault rifles for you
ill
Superstar
Most people don't actually know what the definition of "assault" rifle is. AR's are not assault rifles.
Faced with fascism, from a "nazi dictator" the left still wants to see the citizenry disarmed... 
Everyone who has pointed out how dictators always go after the media should also know they also take away 'the peoples' ability to readily defend themselves.
Everyone who has pointed out how dictators always go after the media should also know they also take away 'the peoples' ability to readily defend themselves.
JahFocus CS
Get It How You Get It
Faced with fascism, from a "nazi dictator" the left still wants to see the citizenry disarmed...
Everyone who has pointed out how dictators always go after the media should also know they also take away 'the peoples' ability to readily defend themselves.
Liberals aren't capable of defeating fascists.
I'd also go as far as to say liberals hold back society more than conservatives
ill
Superstar
Quite a stretch there. Really not comparable to the situation in Afghanistan.
Umm... but they kinda did against the Soviet Union.US military weapons enabled them to defeat Russia. Assault rifles weren't doing jack against those Russian helicopters. Word to Charlie Wilson.
Soviets consider Afghanistan a loss. You bring up another point - that outside influences can help the people on the ground. I'm taking it as your assuming that wouldn't be the case in America? However, every war thats been fought on our soil has had outside help. The French helped supply us against the British during the Revolutionary War. The Spanish also helped against the Brits. Then the Brits supplied arms during the Civil War.
The goal of gun ownership in regards to fighting against a tyrannical government isn't to "win" or to completely destroy that government. Its to provide enough security that you are able to keep the fight going and not get annihilated. Resistance is a powerful force in itself and having the ability to resist is an inalienable right imo.
ThaRealness
Superstar
At least they aren't coming for my RPGs 
Type Username Here
Not a new member
The left is so stupid on this issue.
You're at a crossroads where the other side is armed to the teeth, where an authoritative adminstration has full control of the abusive and overwhelming power its predecessors have created, and where some are advocating policies akin to a full fledged police state...and you want to make your defensive stand with hash tags, safe spaces and Blogs?
Good luck.
You're at a crossroads where the other side is armed to the teeth, where an authoritative adminstration has full control of the abusive and overwhelming power its predecessors have created, and where some are advocating policies akin to a full fledged police state...and you want to make your defensive stand with hash tags, safe spaces and Blogs?
Good luck.
Berniewood Hogan
IT'S BERNIE SANDERS WITH A STEEL CHAIR!
I think the idea is to disarm "the other side."
I brought this up to debunk your inference that the Afghans defeated the Soviets with assault rifles.
I don't equate gun possession with "resistance" and I think the point of an armed populace being able to resist tyranny is way overblown. The government has initiated various authoritarian measures over the last two centuries and nary a peep from the gun loving populace save a few wack jobs here and there (ex. Bundy clan). The modern infatuation with the 2nd amendment is largely a result of an ideological change in the NRA which was supportive of most gun control measures prior to the 70s.
When the NRA Supported Gun Control
Karl T. Frederick, the president of the NRA, testified before Congress stating, “I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.”
All that said I agree the "assault rifle" ban is largely political theater.
The ban is dumb, it doesn't help very much, there are other types of gun control which are far more meaningful that will result in a lot fewer dead people without inconviencing law-abiding gun owners much at all.
But both the right and the left are so stupid on the issue, they fight in unproductive, meaningless ways, and 30,000+ people a year keep dying.
Oh, hell no, who the fukk wants to be fukking Afghanistan.
Who the hell cares if "Russia lost"? Or "America lost"? What actually matters is that AFGHANISTAN LOST. The 40 consecutive years of fighting have made them just about the worst hellhole in the world. You want THAT kind of resistance?
100,000 Mujaheddin died killing 15,000 Russians. War killed 1-2 million civilians, injured 3 million more, led to 7 million refugees (5 million left the country and 2 million internal), opened it up to the takeover by warlords followed by the takeover by insane Islamic militants followed by the takeover by violent Americans, and destroyed any semblance of civilization in most of the country. So pretty much half the population of the country had their lives completely fukked, and the ones that survived without becoming refugees didn't have much going for them either.
"Let's adopt a strategy that will completely destroy our own civilization, so we can have the satisfaction of saying that the other guy 'didn't win'!"
On top of that, @Sukairain is right, they won because of American military assistance, anti-aircraft weapons and such, not assault weapons. RPGs, Redeyes, Stingers, Chinese heavy machine guns, etc.
On top of that, American population centers are FAR larger than Afghanistan's, and the % of Americans who are familiar with and could utilize them from a fighting standpoint is minuscule compared to those who had the capability in Afghanistan. We're domesticated people, not an affiliation of warlords.
Trying to say, "We should cape for this shyt so we can be like Afghanistan!" is some of the most misguided logic I've ever heard.
But both the right and the left are so stupid on the issue, they fight in unproductive, meaningless ways, and 30,000+ people a year keep dying.
Oh, hell no, who the fukk wants to be fukking Afghanistan.
Who the hell cares if "Russia lost"? Or "America lost"? What actually matters is that AFGHANISTAN LOST. The 40 consecutive years of fighting have made them just about the worst hellhole in the world. You want THAT kind of resistance?
100,000 Mujaheddin died killing 15,000 Russians. War killed 1-2 million civilians, injured 3 million more, led to 7 million refugees (5 million left the country and 2 million internal), opened it up to the takeover by warlords followed by the takeover by insane Islamic militants followed by the takeover by violent Americans, and destroyed any semblance of civilization in most of the country. So pretty much half the population of the country had their lives completely fukked, and the ones that survived without becoming refugees didn't have much going for them either.
"Let's adopt a strategy that will completely destroy our own civilization, so we can have the satisfaction of saying that the other guy 'didn't win'!"
On top of that, @Sukairain is right, they won because of American military assistance, anti-aircraft weapons and such, not assault weapons. RPGs, Redeyes, Stingers, Chinese heavy machine guns, etc.
On top of that, American population centers are FAR larger than Afghanistan's, and the % of Americans who are familiar with and could utilize them from a fighting standpoint is minuscule compared to those who had the capability in Afghanistan. We're domesticated people, not an affiliation of warlords.
Trying to say, "We should cape for this shyt so we can be like Afghanistan!" is some of the most misguided logic I've ever heard.
JahFocus CS
Get It How You Get It
And you'll do that how, other than trying to pass a law and then relying on state thugs who are... armed with guns (police, military) to disarm the population?
ill
Superstar
"The other side" are legal gun holders who account for 3% of total gun deaths. Disarming legal holders does nothing to stop the other 97% of gun crimes.