🇳🇱
When the constitution was written it didnt have modern vehicles in mind! Ban assault trucks!
@freemo You know, that actually raises a good point. You might have the right to bear arms... muskets, that is. You probably shouldn't have the right to own one of those modern weapons at all. ;)
@trinsec yes everything modern and dangerous should be banned.. cars, guns, SCUBA, drain cleaner...
@freemo How do you use drain cleaner as a weapon? I'm really curious now! SCUBA I can still see usable as a blunt weapon, especially those oxygen tanks!
@trinsec People have used it as a weapon in some quite brutal assaults. They usually fill a jar with it and splash it on someones face. It can blind and disfigure.
@freemo Makes sense! But it's not produced with the intention to use as a weapon though! Unless you count the war against clogged up drains!
@trinsec So guns are ok but only if they are produced with the intention that they wont be used a weapon? Seems like a rather arbitrary standard to me. Who cares what the person making it "intends"?
@freemo nothing arbitrary about that, these are items designed and built for specific purpose - to wage a war. You can't wage a war with drain cleaner or trucks, even medieval weapon systems will beat that, especially in a city. You don't ban weapons so that one person wouldn't be able to do one stupid thing, you ban them to prevent criminal organization from waging all out wars against each other and the police. After achieving world piece and ending all wars, you might be able to design something that could be a weapon without it becoming a weapon, but meanwhile, if it can be a weapon of war it will be tried, tweaked, produced and marketed as a weapon war.
Incorrect. The AR-15 is not designed to wage a war and has never been used in a single war. Their primary purpose is "small game", as in, farmers shooting at rodents and moles to keep them off their land.
An AR-15 is not even powerful enough to use for deer hunting.
You are likely thinking of the M-16, which has a similar design but is an entierly different gun and is only capable of being used in war due to being fully automatic, which really only works as such because of it being a low-power rifle with low kick back.
@freemo you are the one that just now said that just cause someone says it's not meant for something doesn't change what it is. You take a military design tweak a thing or two so that some law does not exactly apply to it and now all of a sudden it's a whole different thing. It's absurd. Yeah sure it's an obvious disadvantage no military would want, but that hardly changes what the thing is, and I know what hunting rifles look like, those were optimized for their purpose long before AR-15 or M-16 were invented.
I never claimed the AR-15 was not a war weapon simply because of intent. I pointed out real world functional reasons why it isnt (it isnt powerful enough to be useful in war at all, it isnt even powerful enough for deer hunters).
As for you knowing what a hunting rifle is used for.. again the AR-15 is litterally used by the overwhelming majority of owners a rodent and small game hunting. The reason it is the most popular gun in america is because virtually every farmer owns one and uses it for that reason.
No, they dont, wow you really are clueless about guns yet seem to have an opinion... now thats a delusional way to approach the topic.
No an AR-15 has about 1K ft lbs muzzle velocity, which is the lowest muzzle velocity of any rifle on the market. It is literally only barely acceptable for even small game.
1K to 2K is considered useful for small game, 2K to 3K for small game, and 3K up for large game.
Please learn your facts before calling people delusional.
@namark
No, there is a middle ground.. It is quite good and a wonderful weapon for rodents and small game. It is popular for a reason... A military weapon it is not, at least not without automatic fire which is the only thing that made it remotely useful to the military.
@trinsec