Lindsey Graham Politely Explains to Idiot
Reporters Why He needs an AR-15
PJ Media,
by
Stephen Kruiser
Original Article
Posted By: Hazymac,
8/11/2019 8:28:03 AM
A favorite question that the anti-gun crowd likes to ask is "Why does anyone need an AR-15?" Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has a very practical answer to that, which he offered to reporters on Friday. (Snip) That's a very sound point. No matter where you live, you can come up with a legitimate argument for owning an AR-15 for self-defense. Of course, no one ever wants to be in a situation where they have to, but the peace of mind is a gift.
Although he can occasionally be a firebrand, Graham is still a United States senator and was flying with the president on Air Force One when asked
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Highlander 8/11/2019 8:34:46 AM (No. 148906)
My answer: “I need a gun because of people like you.”
29 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
bpl40 8/11/2019 8:38:45 AM (No. 148909)
The key test here is common sense and common use. When the Bill of Rights was adopted there were no repeating side arms in existence. When they were introduced and became commonly owned and used they were automatically covered by the Second Amendment protection. There was no spurious debate (as far as I understand) about why you need it. Will there be a hurricane in your town. A semiautomatic gun fits both descriptions common ownership and common use for hunting, self defense, sport and recreation. Besides the motives of the nay sayers are not genuine. They are not interested in public safety, only exclusive political power.
9 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
BillW. 8/11/2019 8:54:30 AM (No. 148928)
If Mc Connel had come out of his house, those people would have killed him.
MAGA
16 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
bubby 8/11/2019 9:16:38 AM (No. 148948)
#4 Amen great post! Feral hogs and coyotes are a problem in Texas. They are good hunting rifles as well as for self defense. The left likes to obfuscate the 2nd Amendment by saying you don't need an AR15 for hunting! But the Founders didn't put the 2nd Amendment in for hunting but rather to be available for use against a tyrannical Federal Government!
FTA "Sidearms are military weapons too. The phrase "military-style weapons" then immediately becomes a catchall for going after pistols as well." Exactly! The left wants to ban all guns period!
16 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
curious1 8/11/2019 9:22:14 AM (No. 148954)
#2, two corrections/additions.
1. Repeating types of arms had been attempted starting at least in the 1600s. The founders were educated men. Look up Cookson repeating arms that were present in North America in the 18th century, when the BOR was adopted.
2. Even the SCOTUS, in the Miler case of the man charged under the NFA1934, stated that the militia would be expected to have what was in 'common use' by the military.
3 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Strike3 8/11/2019 9:32:21 AM (No. 148962)
Good response and the correct conclusion in the article that they want all of our guns. The AR-15 makes a fine scary example but any real arms expert can tell you that you can drop more people and make bigger holes in them with a standard scoped big game rifle from a safer distance away. These loony kids that walk into schools and a Walmart are going to be killed soon after they start shooting. A skilled sniper can just walk away. Banning any single weapon is a ridiculous waste of time, not to mention unnecessary and illegal meddling with every citizen's rights. As we are aware, the law and common sense are nothing but abstract concepts to Leftists.
5 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Casper27 8/11/2019 9:40:46 AM (No. 148967)
I walked point for months in Nam with 3rd Marines. I carried the M16 and I loved it. But, I kept it clean and cared for, plus shot it a bit to keep it loose. My best bud carried the heavy M14 7.62(.308) a great weapon as well. The early 16's jammed some, but the problem was solved by 1968. You don't want to go full auto anyway unless laying down a protective line of fire. Better to shoot a small burst at the enemy to light him up.
Just some advice. Buy the AR-10, it chambers the .308 which is great at long distances, plus up close a killer after you will not walk away. It can be had for 999.00 at Buds.
13 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Sunhan65 8/11/2019 9:45:35 AM (No. 148975)
FTA: "I am not, however, obligated to explain to anyone why I would prefer not to be killed."
This is a great article, and that is a great reply. Too often, we answer the question rather than questioning the premise. Back when I used to waste time trying to reason with gun controllers, they would always ask why I thought I needed a gun. My answer was, "Because I refuse to die for your beliefs."
11 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
spacer 8/11/2019 10:01:32 AM (No. 148986)
All this blather about red flag laws should make every free person cringe. Listened to Pirro last night. Gaetz gave as good a defense for freedom as he could but Pirro was having none of it. Not once did ANYONE explain the failure of the cops, judges and schools to act on real red flags before almost all of these shootings. From the leftest corrupt sheriff in Tucson, to the authorities in San Jose that ignored warnings about the muslims cache of ????, to the corrupt Broward sheriff and school administrators. Yet I, as an Life NRA member,will face the oncoming assault.
6 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
slsusnr 8/11/2019 10:05:09 AM (No. 148989)
Re #7, Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock's preferred weapon was a Winchester Model 70 .30-06 caliber, a bolt-action rifle. An AR-15 wouldn't cut the mustard. Caliber 30-06 can be fired from how many rifles? I suppose there may be a few, but how many rifles firing that round look like an "assault rifle?" There are lots of M1s still around. They are military arms, but don't look like "assault rifles." This "assault rifle" fixation is maddening. If someone shoots a .22 short at someone else out of a rifle, they've assaulted them with a rifle.
3 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
JrSample 8/11/2019 10:45:07 AM (No. 149045)
I resent having some wealthy liberal politician presume to tell me what I "need".
No, I don't need an AR-15 to hunt. They are unsuitable for hunting: pipsqueak cartridge that lacks the killing power to knock down even medium-sized game. That is irrelevant. If the liberals get their way on this, it won't be very long before they will be saying; "Well, you really don't need to hunt. You can buy meat at the grocery store."
If they were really interested in controlling crime, they wouldn't be insisting on letting criminals out of prison. Most violent crime is committed by repeat felons who have been in prison multiple times and released.
If mass shootings were to end tomorrow, it would have a negligible effect on the murder rate. Most murders are drug-related homicides. and are committed by career criminals with long criminal records.
10 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Grounded 8/11/2019 12:25:13 PM (No. 149126)
The gun grabbers like to focus on the term "well regulated militia" in justifying their agenda that John Q. Public needn't possess firearms unless enlisted in said militia. Then they pivot to the argument that no one needs "military style" firearms, period. Which led me to wonder: If I am a militiaman, wouldn't I require a military style firearm as an integral part of my kit? And who gets to decide what a well regulated militia is? The Second Amendment attaches no conditions as to who may establish and populate the militia.
3 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
HotRod 8/11/2019 1:14:45 PM (No. 149157)
When anyone says to me that the Second Amendment was written when people owned muzzle loaders, so why do people need modern semiautomatic rifles, I respond that when the Constitution and amendments were written there were no radios, TVs, or computers either, so why does the media need more than a broadsheet?
7 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
GO3 8/11/2019 1:33:56 PM (No. 149170)
“In 1776, all rifles were assault rifles.”
- P.J. O’Rourke
7 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
DVC 8/11/2019 6:32:46 PM (No. 149322)
Because of the predators.
Four legged and two.
2 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
Smart11344 8/12/2019 1:45:46 PM (No. 150104)
Why would I have to explain to the press what kind of legal gun that I own. That would be like asking the press how many stories they have fabricated.
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Hazymac"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)