Neo

So, let's arm everybody with everything, man, woman, and child. Full auto M4's, green tip bullets, grenade launchers, belt fed machine guns, miniguns. Let's put machine gun turrets on our roofs of our houses, drive around with loaded fully automatic AK47's in the passenger seat. Why don't we just do away with all gun laws and go back to the wild west? No more background checks, carry your gun anywhere, including schools. At least there won't be anymore school shootings when every third grader is carrying a piece.

13 hours ago, Jax said:

Oh, you're one of those type of idiots that pretend to have a clue what the 2nd amendment really means.

Shall not infringe, there's no exceptions or clauses in there.

Quick, pass your knowledge to SCOTUS so they can ban whatever your dumbass deems fit, clown.

I sorry you can't handle someone else's take on something. The second amendment is vague because I believe, even back then, they knew times would change, technology would change, along with advances in weaponry. 

How does an assault weapons ban or gun reform violate the your rights if you still have a gun safe full of guns that you are allowed to have?

6 minutes ago, nickers said:

Take your meds you bi polar idiot..

Says the bi-polar idiot.

34 minutes ago, AP1 said:

It's safe to say that Flacco won't be coming back.

I hated him as a Raven, enjoyed him as a Brown. November and December were my most enjoyable moments, as a fan, since 1994.

I trust Berry, he must believe it was a flash in the pan. 

In the moment, I hope it was as well. I'd hate to see him go somewhere and light it up.

But I understand the move, the Front Office doesn't want the stadium chanting Flacco, the first time DW throws a pick.

For the record, I said I didn't want Flacco to see the field until the playoffs started because I was afraid he was going to get hurt before the playoffs started, or what we saw with him peaking during the regular season and fizzle out. Ideally I would have liked to see DTR get us to the Bengals game and have Flacco start the Bengals game as a tune up for the postseason. I did not like the way that last game was handled.

17 hours ago, FY56 said:

No, it's not good enough.

16 hours ago, nickers said:

oo bad you're not an abortion statistic

12 hours ago, Jax said:

Liberals always gotta play the drama queen victim.

Oh hey, I thought you guys were all about protecting babies? I guess I can check that off the list of stuff that bullshit. Just another thing for you to bitch about and fake outrage. Like you care about babies.

12 hours ago, Jax said:

You must be one, insecure miserable person.

Hope you enjoy your jog with your little 22 stuffed in your butt crack

So I guess it's so long Flacco.

So, we lost Anthony Walker and TakiTaki, how do people feel about Jordan Hicks? Upgrade? Meh? What direction do we go for replacing TakiTaki? Saw there were some good linebacker available. Patrick Queen was one, Devin White was another. Are they the right fit?

18 minutes ago, tiamat63 said:

The world at large has been shifting to this mindset, the last decade or so it has really picked up steam.  Not just in football, but just about every aspect of life. 

 

 I can't stand it.    Especially when it's something I've loved and been deeply devoted to pretty much my entire life. 

You're right. And not to derail this thread, you can see it in the auto industry. They pump out hundreds of cars a day but they are mostly junk. My car developed an oil leak around 75,000 miles and I suspect it has been leaking long before that.

Just saw TakiTaki headed to NE.

• LB Sione Takitaki: Signing a two-year, $6.5 million deal that can be worth up to $10 million with some likely-to-be-earned incentives. (Tom Pelissero)

16 minutes ago, Dutch Oven said:

Well look here, it's Ruh-Tard Tourette's Cal! 

My goodness, the inferiority complex on that one. 

You ever wonder if certain people are really that stupid, or do they do it just to piss you off?

1 hour ago, FY56 said:

question then get nasty,

Blow me

1 hour ago, FY56 said:

Being that there are 16 million Americans that own AR15's, and possibly no such incidents that you described pertaining to these weapons, I would venture to say that the overwhelming majority of those that own these weapons are responsible, safety minded individuals. Wouldn't you agree?

Completely irrelevant. You really are 100% a dick, aren't you? Does it come natural, or is it a rite of passage for conservatives? 

1 hour ago, FY56 said:

he gun wasn't an AR 15 your neighbor was playing with, possibly a handgun?

Highlighting my point, so thanks. If a handgun round made it through her wall, a 5.56 would went though her wall and three or four other walls. 

So, are we looking for middle linebacker in FA or that draft?

22 minutes ago, nickers said:

I guess we need to ban

Tornados...

Lightening..

Hurricanes

Snow storms

Plandemics

Cars..

Walking out or your house

Trains

Airplanes..

 

Because banning guns is gonna save the whole fucking world and everybody in it...

 

But lets keep Abortions legal by God!!...

 

You are one stupid mother fucker and a Ccunt ass bitch...

 

When you fall asleep at night, clutching your firearm, I hope it's with the barrel in your mouth, and a round in the chamber.

11 minutes ago, FY56 said:

16 million Americans own AR 15's

Name one time that the scenario you have just described had occurred.

My niece was nearly taken from me by some asshole playing with a gun in the apartment next to my sisters. The bullet narrowly missed her while she was asleep in her crib. Is that good enough for you, you shit eating scumbag?

1 hour ago, FY56 said:

If someone wants an AR-15 chambered in 5.56 NATO and a 30+ round capacity magazine to defend their home, then it's really none of your business.

It's not? Would you want to live in a densely populated area like an apartment complex if your idiotic neighbor's first choice for defense was a semi-automatic rifle chambered in those rounds? He would kill the intruder and his neighbors too. I guess if you live on a farm and own a lot of land and the nearest neighbors house is a mile away, then I guess an AR would make sense. 

I guess it depends on the situation and making a sensible choice on a firearm. Not that "sensible" would be something in your vocabulary.

56 minutes ago, Jax said:

There's more semi auto guns with even more damaging rounds. I have a couple of those as well.

Home protection is not the only reason people own ARs, but thanks for decreeing what the rest of us peasants should be allowed to own.

But AR's are cheap and easy to get, and so are the mags. Somebody I know once bought a 44 magnum model 29 for around 600-700 dollars brand new. I also see bargain bin AR's going for around the same price. Which one do you think a mass shooter is going to pick?

2 hours ago, Jax said:

Registration gives gov't a list they can come confiscate at any point they wish. Registration stops nothing, it literally does nothing to stop any amount of violence, so it's infringement on my rights.

Oh for fuck's sake, do we have to go over this again and again? The second amendment language is VAGUE and open to interpretation. 

U.S. Constitution - Second Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Second Amendment

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

"SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" 

 

And what shall not be infringed? "The right of the people to keep and bear arms"

 

If you actually go by the definition of the words used, does an assault weapons ban infringe your rights? Technically, No. 

 

Does an assault weapons ban prevent you from "keeping and bearing arms" , NO. Since you can still go out and buy and keep any firearm not listed in the ban.

 

Even though California had a assault weapons ban, they were still allowed to buy firearms.

 

Gun laws in California - Wikipedia

 

 

"Private sales of firearms must be done through a licensed dealer. All firearm sales are recorded by the state, and have a ten-day waiting period. Unlike most other states, California has no provision in its state constitution that explicitly guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.^[7] The California Supreme Court has maintained that most of California's restrictive gun laws are constitutional, because the state's constitution does not explicitly guarantee private citizens the right to purchase, possess, or carry firearms. However, U.S. Supreme Court decisions of Heller (2008) and McDonald (2010) established that the Second Amendment applies to all states within the Union, and many of California's gun laws are now being challenged in the federal courts."

 

 

Again, if actually go by the definition of the words used, then an infringement of your rights would be if California said that you are not allowed to carry any guns whatsoever Monday through Friday, only on the weekends. I carry my gun almost everywhere, including stores. In fact, I would even go as far as saying that signs posted on stores telling you that you're not allowed to carry on their property are more of an infringement of your rights than the California assault weapons ban is. But I get it though, why business owners wouldn't want you carrying in their store.

 

 

 

 

 

Somehow, I don't see this as being a complete disaster for them. Pittsburgh is never going to be an easy out for us. For a fanbase that is thirsty  for a Super Bowl title like we are, it sure sucks that we are in the toughest division in football.

If you need an AR-15 chambered in 5.56 NATO or .223 and a 30+ round capacity magazine to defend your home then you have an even bigger problem. I know the AR platform can be chambered in a number of different calibers but .223 and 5.56 seem to be the most available calibers in my local sports shops and gun stores. It's more than likely the most readily available caliber across the country. If you can actually hit the broad side of a barn, anyone can stop a crackhead breaking into your house at 3am with a simple pistol or 12 gauge shotgun. 

1 hour ago, MLD Woody said:

But I'll let you take it from here. Or maybe NEO will respond 

Nah, I think I'm going to leave well enough alone. I think I better leave before one of the resident MAGA geniuses reminds me that "AR" doesn't stand for "assault rifle" 

15 minutes ago, Jax said:

You really believe everyone thinks hammers are as dangerous as ARs?

I've seen that floated around here many times, DICKFACE. But of course you would know. Don't you have something better to do like saying some dumb shit about sheep herders using AK's or something? Or maybe they also use grains of fucking assault sand. Maybe Myles Garrett uses an "assault helmet"

1 hour ago, Jax said:

You're too much of a dumbass

This is coming from the fuckface that joins a Browns Board and heads straight to this place and spends most of his/her time here bitching and whining. Are you even a Browns fan, Jaxoff? 

When I said people buy the AR because it looks cool, and customizable, but because when the shit hits the fan, they want firepower. Why do you think the AR platform is popular amongst US Citizens, law enforcement, and mass shooters alike?

Saying  "50,000 reasons and counting why you need an AR-15" is an acknowledgement that the AR platform is a powerful and dangerous weapon system capable of mass casualties. But when you call the AR an assault rifle, you get the what about the assault forks, and assault screwdrivers, and blah blah, but you ALSO NEED one in case you need to fight off the government. But you can't just admit it outright, that AR's are a dangerous weapon. 

4 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

That was exactly the idea when they wrote the amendment.

If you want to use the second amendment card, then why not stand behind it? What's with the assault forks , assault knives, pencils nonsense? Why not just lead with that? "Yeah, we know AR's are dangerous, but so what. The second amendment allows us to have them"  How are you going to solve a problem when half the population thinks AR's are no more dangerous than a hammer?

1 hour ago, Jax said:

How did the sheep herders in Afghanistan do with worn out AK-47s?

And truck mounted technicals, and RPG's, and IED's, and mortars, and alot more. But yeah, they also use AK's.

9 minutes ago, Ibleedbrown said:

I suppose the idea is to go toe to toe with the govt if it comes to that. They have AR 15s, we should have AR 15s They have tanks. We should have tanks. They have bazookas…

Bazookas!

Yeah, but my apartment doesn't have parking accommodations for a stealth fighter😀 

50 minutes ago, Vambo said:

Do people really need a Covette, Maserati, Rolls-Royce or Ferrari ? All you really need is a VW bug.

You're making my point for me. People don't need Covette's but they look badass and go fast, that's why people buy them. Are they practical? No. Would you take a NASCAR right from the track and drive it on the street? You could, but highly impractical and it would totally suck as a daily driver. If you want to be able to drive a car all year round and want good gas milage, you buy the VW.

 

 

40 minutes ago, Ibleedbrown said:

. There should be trusted community members that have those. Maybe tanks and bazookas too. Especially bazookas. 

I don’t want a bazooka though. I really like saying bazooka though. 

Bazooka. 

Maybe personal tactical thermo nuclear weapons while we're at it. Where do you draw the line?

Look, my original response was on point and on topic and just want to hear it from him why we need AR-15's. It's his thread, he's the one saying it.

And my response is basically saying, we buy AR-15's for the same reason everybody else buys them, because we WANT them, and because they look badass, are highly customizable. But when someone tells me I NEED one, I want to know why. I know why people NEED guns in general. Tell me why you think I need that specific gun, that's all. I, and millions of other Americans, have gotten along just fine with protecting our families and properties with just handguns and shotguns, and bolt action rifles for hundreds of years.