Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Family of AR-15 Inventor Eugene Stoner: He Didn't Intend It for Civilians

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by skooly View Post

    Of course it's relevant because the case law says weapons of war aren't protected. What better evidence is there of its intended purpose than the inventor's own words and intentions?
    So ban weapons of war. That includes these:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_pistol

    Those handguns are weapons of war and by the standard you seek to enforce, they are subject to ban.

    Not happening.
    HFM

    As long as there exists people with religion and a belief in God, there will never be a Libertarian state.

    Comment


    • #17
      In almost all cases, handguns are not being used to shoot dozens of people at a time like the AR-15 or other assault weapons. Itís truly the mass murdererís weapon of choice. You guys keep trying to compare it to materially dissimilar instrumentalities, including duct tape (!), and itís just preposterous. I think we all recognize the inventors words and intentions strike deep against the idea that these weapons belong in civilian hands.
      "I guess I just hate the fact there is public property at all." - Mr. Raceboy.

      Comment


      • #18
        First off, quote me Stoner. Because if you think hearsay of offspring is persuasive, a revisit of 1L evidence is needed. Second, youíve shifted from using a weapons of war standard to a because itís being used standard. News flash, that is not the standard.

        Claymore, land mines, bazookas, rocket launchers, mortars, hand grenades, mini guns I can see these as weapons of war as intended to be limited by Scalia. And, my interpretation may be overly limiting. What I can say is that a rifle is not intended to be limited. Just because itís called an assault rifle doesnít make it a weapon of war that should be banned. At war, we have snipers effectively using a high powered hunting rifle with high caliber and a scope. That can be described as a weapon of war but for the same way a service pistol or an AR is not a weapon of war intended to be limited or the kind of weapon listed above, it should not be banned and, you will see folks yelling bloody hell if you try to take away their deer hunting .308.

        The limited number of states that presently have an assault weapon ban are bastions of liberal / socialist idiocy and, with the current make up of our Supreme Court, we should be seeing rulings clarifying the legality of ARs and, the right to carry.
        HFM

        As long as there exists people with religion and a belief in God, there will never be a Libertarian state.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Mr. Raceboy View Post

          The greatest murderer of people in mass is government, yet you suck on its teat like a good little sub. You're basically The Gimp. As far as Gimps go, you are dedicated to your Dom, I'll give you that.
          Government.....or religion?
          01000010 01100001 01100001 00100000 01110111 01100101 01100101 01110000 00100000 01100111 01110010 01100001 01101000 01101110 01100001 00100000 01110111 01100101 01100101 01110000 00100000 01101110 01101001 01101110 01101110 01111001 00100000 01100010 01101111 01101110 01100111

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Beemer View Post

            Government.....or religion?
            For most of our history, they were one and the same.

            Pete (knows that in many countries they still are)

            Comment

            Working...
            X