Walmart stops selling AR15's

[Dallas69]

I am not against gun ownership.
I own a gun for protection in my home.
I think pistols,hunting rifles and shotguns are fine.
These all have a legitimate purpose for hunting,target shooting,self defense.
My issue is semi auto weapons with large capacity clips.
No hunter needs these to kill game.

,

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69

My issue is semi auto weapons with large capacity clips.
No hunter needs these to kill game.

True..hunters don't need them to kill game..what is your point?

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69
I am not against gun ownership.
I own a gun for protection in my home.
I think pistols,hunting rifles and shotguns are fine.
These all have a legitimate purpose for hunting,target shooting,self defense.
My issue is semi auto weapons with large capacity clips.
No hunter needs these to kill game.

,


Killing game is not the reason your right to keep and bear arms is protected in the Constitution.

Your right to defend yourself is protected.

Why stop yourself with semi-auto weapons? Surely no good hunter needs more than one shot, right? No target cares how fast you can reload. So, actually, all you need for that is a .22 single shot.

So, give up your bolt action, give up your pump action, give up your auto-loading shotgun...give up your revolver...none of these are justifiable for "legitimate sporting purposes". You only need one shot to hit your game or your target...so, why do you have all that excess capacity in your firearms?

 

[Dallas69]

So you can't feel protected with a pistol,shotgun or hunting rifle?
Man where do you live?

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69
So you can't feel protected with a pistol,shotgun or hunting rifle?
Man where do you live?


How I feel is irrelevant. You predicate the argument based on fear? I am not fearful. I reserve the right to choose the best tool. Do you have airbags in your car? Why? Don't feel protected with just seatbelts? Man, where do you drive?

You told me that I can't have a "large capacity magazine"...so, what is that? 15 rounds, as in Colorado? 7 rounds, as in New York?

If I don't need more than, what, 6 rounds (.357 revolver) to defend myself, then why do the police need more than 6 rounds to defend themselves and the public?

Is my marksmanship better than theirs? Do I remain more calm under stress than they do?

Why not limit me to one round? Surely, I only need one to make the bad guy fall down, just like Hollywood, right?

What if I am older, or weaker, or smaller, and can't handle the recoil of a shotgun, or my arthritic, or smaller, or younger hands can't hold a pistol well any more? Do you deny me the use of a carbine that is ergonomically designed, easy to hold, easy to aim and has low recoil?

Because that's what an AR-15 actually is...it's not just evil and black...it's ergonomic, easy to aim, easy to shoot, and low recoil...that's why my 13 year old daughter was tagging the bullseye every time on the day she learned to shoot.

A hunting rifle might make you feel safe, but it is a terrible choice for personal defense, by the way...it's no good at short ranges...and at long range, you're not threated...so you have no right to shoot...the shotgun is the choice of our Vice-President, who has advocated a whimsical combination of disarming yourself while simultaneously commiting a felony by firing when not threatened...but a shotgun is not my preference...and a pistol is OK...if you can't get to a rifle, or if you need to carry a weapon on your person.

I prefer a carbine/rifle for almost every situation...but I'll carry a pistol when I need to conceal and have it with me. (OBTW, the Federal Agency for which I work issues a high-capacity pistol with 2 spare magazines...wonder why they feel that I need that many rounds?)

If I have the right to self-defense, then that right is limited when I can't choose the best weapon for my situation.

But please allow me the right to select a weapon that suits me for my purposes. Just as you have chosen your hunting rifle, or shot gun, or pistol.

 

[ExMachina]

"Walmart stops selling AR15's"
What? When did they start selling them?
And does that come with a free RPG if I buy two? Geeeeesh.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69
So you can't feel protected with a pistol,shotgun or hunting rifle?
Man where do you live?

 

[ExMachina]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69
So you can't feel protected with a pistol,shotgun or hunting rifle?
Man where do you live?

Chiraq maybe. Which is worse now that the cops can't 'profile'.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: ExMachina
"Walmart stops selling AR15's"
What? When did they start selling them?
And does that come with a free RPG if I buy two? Geeeeesh.


The AR15 is nothing more than a semi automatic rifle that can be had in a variety of calibers. It is no different function wise than a traditional appearing rifle. Don't let the fact it looks like an M16 fool you. It is not fully automatic nor does it's appearance give it any kind of advantage.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69
I am not against gun ownership.
I own a gun for protection in my home.
I think pistols,hunting rifles and shotguns are fine.
These all have a legitimate purpose for hunting,target shooting,self defense.
My issue is semi auto weapons with large capacity clips.
No hunter needs these to kill game.

,


So you have decided that hunters don't need semi auto weapons with large capacity clips to kill game so any gun that meets that criteria should be banned( you didn't specifically say banned but we all know that is what you mean ). Yet in the same quote you claim you are okay with pistols, shotguns, and rifles for hunting, target shooting, and self defense which totally ignores the fact many of those have the ability to use extended capacity magazines and clips. So which is it? Any gun that holds X# of rounds should be banned or just the ones you don't like the look of like the AR15? You don't even know what you are saying anymore.

You say one thing then contradict yourself a few sentences later. Hard to follow you or give any credence to your posts the way you jump around so. Wow. Also, how many rounds is too many? The AR15 has clips with a capacity ranging from 5 rounds to 100. Are you okay with an A15 if it only has 5 rounds, 10 rounds, 20 rounds??? Where do you draw the line? You can buy a "hunting rifle" as you called it above, that uses a clip style magazine, that can have the same capacity as an AR15. Do we ban those too?

As Astro14 pointed, out by your logic any gun capable of firing more than one round before reloading should be banned including that gun you claim to own for self defense unless it is a single shot. I have to ask, have you ever been target shooting? If so, what is more fun, being able to shoot 20+ times or 5-10 before having to stop and reload? If you really have been you know the answer is 20+. As far as self defense goes give me as many rounds as possible before I have to reload should I ever have to defend myself. I would much rather have more rounds than I need than run out. You never have enough rounds in a fire fight.

Your arguments just do not hold water. It shouldn't matter how many rounds the gun holds if the person who owns it has no criminal record and has done nothing wrong.

You claim to own a gun, and you may well, but I have to be honest and say I find that highly unlikely. You do not sound like a gun owner at all to me. Thank goodness the rest of us who own guns don't think as you do or we would all lose our gun rights. Give the anti's an inch and they will take it all.

 

[spasm3]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69

My issue is semi auto weapons with large capacity clips.
No hunter needs these to kill game.
,


Not for hunting, but in some areas of the country, they are needed for self defense.
Its not up to you to decide what others need.
Just so you know, the term is magazine, not clips.

 

[camarokiller]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69

My issue is semi auto weapons with large capacity clips.
No hunter needs these to kill game.

,


Whats your view on an auto loading shotgun for sporting?
I think 8-9 rounds of slugs/buckshot is way more devistating than a dinky 5.56.

I like my guns, but honestly who cares if walmart has ARs anyhow? Way better choices at real shops

 

[Dallas69]

Why do you have your panties in a wad?
I won't come to your door and take your guns.
Relax,this is just a little talk between adults with different views.
Since you asked about what limit I would put on bullets ,I would say 10 is plenty.
So what if you have to reload more,the practice is probably good for you.
So there you go,you have your guns and only have to reload more often.
I don't make the laws,I only try to obey them.
In the big picture I'm a nobody just like you.

 

[Win]

Seems pretty clear he's not a gun owner.

 

[dlundblad]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69
Why do you have your panties in a wad?
I won't come to your door and take your guns.
Relax,this is just a little talk between adults with different views.
Since you asked about what limit I would put on bullets ,I would say 10 is plenty.
So what if you have to reload more,the practice is probably good for you.
So there you go,you have your guns and only have to reload more often.
I don't make the laws,I only try to obey them.
In the big picture I'm a nobody just like you.


My view is that if it doesnt take much to reload, why not just have a few 30 round magazines vs. several 10 round magazines? Just think about how much greener 30 round mags are.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: spasm3
Originally Posted By: Dallas69

My issue is semi auto weapons with large capacity clips.
No hunter needs these to kill game.
,


Not for hunting, but in some areas of the country, they are needed for self defense.
Its not up to you to decide what others need.
Just so you know, the term is magazine, not clips.


A removable magazine can be called a clip. Just to be fair here.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69
Why do you have your panties in a wad?
I won't come to your door and take your guns.
Relax,this is just a little talk between adults with different views.
Since you asked about what limit I would put on bullets ,I would say 10 is plenty.
So what if you have to reload more,the practice is probably good for you.
So there you go,you have your guns and only have to reload more often.
I don't make the laws,I only try to obey them.
In the big picture I'm a nobody just like you.


My shorts are just fine thanks.

No, you won't be the one to come for my guns but the politicians who vote in anti gun laws will send government agencies after them. If gun owners don't stay educated and vigilant that will happen. It is clear you can't be counted on to help defend my gun ownership rights. If anything you will help with it by voting for politicians with an anti gun agenda. If you "really" do own a gun, which truthfully I highly doubt, your apathy and willingness to believe they just want to ban X,Y,Z and not guns as a whole, will help lead to eventual gun bans.

I am not even going to respond to your 10 round limit. I asked( although it wasn't really meant to be answered )so I will leave it at that.

I obey the laws as well. However, I use my vote to make sure that the laws passed are reasonable.

The combined votes of the US gun owners are very powerful. Individuals may not have a lot of sway but as a group we do. At least when untied. If gun owners had been this meek and willing to give up as much as you seem to be we would have all lost our guns decades ago.

 

[whip]

On the Facebook gun pages I follow, gun owners are outraged at Walmart's decision. They were OK with the company mistreating the employees. They were OK with the filthy conditions. They were OK with the welfare abuse. Now, many are claiming they will boycott. Funny how that works.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted By: Astro14


Killing game is not the reason your right to keep and bear arms is protected in the Constitution.



EXACTLY.

 

[dlundblad]

Originally Posted By: whip
On the Facebook gun pages I follow, gun owners are outraged at Walmart's decision. They were OK with the company mistreating the employees. They were OK with the filthy conditions. They were OK with the welfare abuse. Now, many are claiming they will boycott. Funny how that works.


I dont get how Walmart is deemed evil compared to other retailers especially when their pay is similar and often times more than other grocery stores.