Just so we're clear you're moving the goal post of justifying gun law restrictions from
is it really right wing authoritarism?
to
does it prevent you from feeling safe from being gunned down by citizens with military grade weapons?
to
do citizens really NEED "military grade" weapons?
Now, I have no problem moving in this direction and answering that if you want, but the fact that the goal post has been moved several times should be acknowledged.
The 2nd amendment only gives citizens the rights to bear arms.
The Ar-15 IS a firearm, thus is included in the 2nd amendment rights to bear arms unlike the crew manned and area weapons you named in your example, which is indeed a strawman, because I've never stated that regular civilians should be able to legally own those.
It doesn’t say that private citizens have the right to own an arsenal of military grade weapons used in war at their disposal. Laws that would restrict that level of weaponry aren’t restricting your freedom. I’m not saying that citizens shouldn’t have the right to bear arms, in saying that there needs to common sense restrictions on the grade of weaponry that private citizens can have. You’re not even dealing with that actual argument, you’re just deflecting to your strawman “you want to take our freedom away” bullshyt just like these dumbass right-wing crackers.
The second amendment states that civilians have the right to bear arms, there isn't any inherent restrictions based on what you've randomly deemed to be 'military grade'(and we'll get to that later). So, if you are attempting to further restrict my right to purchase or own a firearm of any kind(because there are already plenty of restrictions on the 2nd amendment in place), then you are by definition seeking to limit my freedom.
Your whole position is that you need the right to own weaponry without any restrictions for “personal defense”.
I never said this issue was about what a person 'needs', because that's pretty subjective and I shouldn't have restrictions to my freedom being decided by someone's subjective idea about what they feel each and every citizen the nation over needs to have in any and all situations(as if there aren't an infinite number of factors that could come into play from person to person when determining that), but about freedom of choice. And I'd like to be able to make that decision myself, not have that decided for me based on your and anyone else's arbitrary assessment of personal necessity. Laws are never passed on the basis of restricting people based on what they "need", only and nothing else, anyway. That fact is that the AR-15 or any other Semi-Auto rifle CAN, has been useful in personal self defense on MANY occasions, and is in fact very sufficient for home defense.
Personal defense from who? You don’t need military grade weapons like AR-15s to defend yourself from other private citizens. If you’re a private citizen not live ing a criminal life(which I’m not judging one way or the other), then you wouldn’t need an ar-15 for personal defense. Hand guns and regular rifles serve as personal protection from other citizens just fine. You would only need those military grade type of weapons for defense against a government military or a government militarized police force, and those groups have access to the level of military weaponry that I listed in the last post. So if you’re really worried about being able to defend yourself from the government then why wouldn’t you want access to tanks, fighter planes, nukes and everything else? You’re not even consistent in your bullshyt. Fully and semi-automatic assault rifles aren’t going to protect you from the military or even the police force. You can have all the assault rifles that you want, and it still wouldn’t stop your local police force from coming to get you if they decided to because they have access to more advanced weaponry.
Okay, right so lets get to this. What and who's definition are you going off of for you to deem the ar 15 a 'military grade weapon'? It can't be the ATF's, because it doesn't have a barrel length of less than 16' or greater than 26', and it can't be the original manufacture's as they designed the common AR 15 that is being spoken about
specifically as a variant of the military issued M16 rifle & the M4 carbine for civilian use as a sporting rifle, the difference being that the AR-15 doesn't allow for fully auto or burst fire, or anything other than semi-auto fire, and is fits the legally required length requirement of a 16 inch barrel length unlike the M4 Carbine. The military does NOT use the common civilian Ar-15s that are currently being scrutinized in the media, and the military issued m16s & m4s are NOT legal for civilian use nor are the added specs(unless you go through the next to impossible process with the ATF). So, where you get the idea that people are running around with a bunch of 'military grade' weaponry gunning others down is beyond my imagination. Though, I understand that ignorance on the matter breeds this sort of rabid sensationalism you're displaying.
Furthermore, in this bid to ban such big bad scary "military grade" weapons lies the assumption that weapons being used by the military means they must be the biggest, best and baddest thing out there when in reality the standard issued military weapons are chosen because they fit the budget of the military quite frankly, and they work well in certain situations specific to niche military applications like close quarter squadron combat- thus the shorter barrel length on the M4 where they give up velocity, accuracy, and durability for maneuverability in close quarters with other soldiers- Same reason the M4 has a heavier trigger so they don't accidentally discharge when travelling rough terrain and bump into each other. But it's inferior to a common AR-15 in pretty much every other situation aside from the fully auto fire. Not to mention the AR is one of the most modular rifles out there which allows to be be tuned, modded, and customized in a variety of different ways.
The standard AR-15 is actually a superb choice as a home self defense weapon, for someone who isn't trying to break the bank as it allows the user to have fire superiority over %95 of would be robbers and burglars, seeing as they most often use handguns, because they're easy to conceal(most burglars aren't totting around rifles when looking to break into a house), as the allow for a much better optical capabilities to see in the dark and blind burglars, they are far more accurate, and they have less recoil(thus higher rates of fire), and have higher capacity rounds, thus the user will be more confident in standing their ground and taking out multiple targets if need be.
See here
and here
....for two relatively recent cases.
And if by chance we were in a situation where we had to defend ourselves from a rouge WS government, we certainly wouldn't use conventional warfare like that you would see of to states of comparable militaristic capabilities. We would have to employ irregular guerrilla tactics such as those that were employed SUCCESSFULLY for instance by the Afghans during the Soviet occupation, the bangledeshis during the rebellion from pakistan and the Vietcong during the American occupation.
Your position isn’t about personal protection you’re just spouting talking points.
Yeah, sure, but I certainly don't want anyone, especially someone as ignorant as you on the matter, attempting to enforce on me what I can and can't have based on what you arbitrarily think I need, based on what you arbitrarily consider to be a "military grade weapon", and rightfully so, with all due respect.
nikka did you even go to a D1 school to say that? I went to UGA and was friends with a lot of the players and they loved them some BW. The white girls got no respect, they were nothing more than cum dumpsters, chefs, and paper writers.
All firearms are not covered under the 2nd amendment. Like I said, the M16 is currently banned, so is the uzi. I think tech-9s are too. There are plenty of restrictions to what firearms citizens can own already on the books depending on your state and there always has been. You’re embarrassing yourself.
