All Things 2nd Amendment
- Thread starter StillHustlin
- Start date
If no one needs an AR-15 then why do police agencies have and continue to purchase them?
Your tax money has gone to arm Washington State Troopers with Smith & Wesson M&P in 40 S&W. WSP, Remington 870 shotguns, AR-15 rifles and HK MP5 submachine guns. I don't know about your county and city (don't know where you live) but you have likely helped them purchase the same or similar weapons as well, and of course we all have been buying them for the feds, that according to you don't need them. Your agencies also sell the confiscated weapons to the general public, just as mine does. So, if no one needs them, why are you indirectly purchasing them for law enforcement and what have you done to stop the resale of the weapons where you live?
People talk a good game, but they don't mean it.
Your tax money has gone to arm Washington State Troopers with Smith & Wesson M&P in 40 S&W. WSP, Remington 870 shotguns, AR-15 rifles and HK MP5 submachine guns. I don't know about your county and city (don't know where you live) but you have likely helped them purchase the same or similar weapons as well, and of course we all have been buying them for the feds, that according to you don't need them. Your agencies also sell the confiscated weapons to the general public, just as mine does. So, if no one needs them, why are you indirectly purchasing them for law enforcement and what have you done to stop the resale of the weapons where you live?
People talk a good game, but they don't mean it.
Last edited:
A high school teacher was arrested today for shooting at a window at the school he teaches at. No students were hit.
UPDATE: Teacher in custody after shot fired at Dalton HS - WRCBtv.com | Chattanooga News, Weather & Sports
UPDATE: Teacher in custody after shot fired at Dalton HS - WRCBtv.com | Chattanooga News, Weather & Sports
oo:
I have no problem with the 2nd Amendment myself. My problem comes in when you have civilians who have access to high-powered assault weapons. In my opinion, there is no reason an untrained civilian should be able to get their hands on an AK-47, HK, SKS, etc. Those are war weapons and should only be used in combat.
Isn't the intent of all guns to kill? So why does it matter if a civilian has one that you dislike vs one you are okay with? In the event some crazy has one? So it's okay for them to murder 17 people, you just not cool with 30 or 100? These arguments don't make sense to me.
Props:
kane916 and kane916
I was referring to assault weapons. That was my fault for not looking into the topic as closely as I should have. Like StillHustlin said, the intent of all guns is to kill. I guess I have a soft spot for the innocent victims of gun violence, especially when they are women, children, the elderly and/or the differently abled. That's all I was trying to say.
Technically anything could be an “Assault Weapon”. If I stomped somebody’s head with my steeltoe boots then the police could charge me with assault with a deadly weapon...A kitchen knife or a hammer could be an assault weapon. Should they ban kitchen knives and hammers?
Last edited:
If I say "yes", then I'm labeled a "square" or a "sucka". Not that any of that matters. Or because I just so happen to listen to (gangsta) rap, among other genres, someone is bound to hop on their computer and into this thread and pull the "well aren't you a fuck the police guy" card outta their ass. It's happened before. The police have killed people with less (i.e. Eric Garner, Philando Castile, Tamir Rice, Mike Brown, etc.)