Some days, those who would command govern represent us just make it too easy for, among other things, finding “post fodder.”

In the shadow of Michael William Nash’s demonstration of his 2nd Amendment rights on Saturday, according to The News…

Twelve Michigan House Republicans have sponsored a bill this month to the name the AR-15 “the official rifle of this state,” drawing criticism from opponents who labeled the proposal unserious and inappropriate.

For those who don’t know, the AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle. Bear that in mind when reading the following.

State Rep. Brian BeGole, R-Antrim Township, a former Shiawassee County sheriff, was the primary backer of the AR-15 measure and said in a statement issued Tuesday that thousands of people in Michigan own an AR-15. […] “This distinction recognizes these law-abiding gun owners who are often vilified just for having a firearm as a hobbyist or to keep their homes and families safe," BeGole said.

That’s some hobby. Keep their homes and families safe. Safe from the government BeGole has represented most of his life, according to the oft-debated 2nd Amendment.

However, Ryan Bates, director of End Gun Violence Michigan, said BeGole’s bill was about “worshiping the rifle that is the preferred weapon of mass shooters.” […] Bates noted that on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a federal ban on bump stocks, a rapid-fire gun accessory that was used in a mass shooting at a music festival Las Vegas in 2017.

“That shooter used 23 AR-style rifles modified with bump stocks to kill 58 people and injure nearly 500 in mere minutes,” Bates said. “We now live in a world where any deranged person can turn an AR-style rifle into a machine gun capable of firing 400-800 rounds per minute, a level of firepower that quite simply overwhelms law enforcement.”

We all know that rabbit and pheasant can get pretty mean. And who doesn’t like their venison pre-ground? To quote my favorite philosopher and thinker, myself…

It’s forever High Noon in this nation of cowboys.

Ah, almost forgot! Use it everyday!

Alt link for your convenience via archive.is

If you can’t see the crazy person on the bus, it’s you.
[email protected] ☆ [email protected] ☆ [email protected]

  • Olhonestjim@lemmy.worldEnglish
    92·
    5 months ago

    I’m a gun owner. I have an AR-15. I don’t want to hurt anybody, just to be able to defend my home against these very same lunatics. If anybody is going to get guns banned in the USA, it’s gonna be these people doing it to themselves by their unsafe, insane, hateful practices endangering everybody else.

      • Olhonestjim@lemmy.worldEnglish
        9·
        5 months ago

        Well, only because Republicans, the NRA, and cops were terrified and absolutely beside themselves at the idea of black people arming themselves and organizing for community support and defense.

    • BleatingZombie@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      5 months ago

      I’m also concerned why they want to pledge allegiance to a company (Armalite). Is Kansas going to have Coke as their state drink next?

      • HelixDab2@lemm.eeEnglish
        2·
        5 months ago

        Armalite may still make them, but it’s a bit player in the market now. Since the AR-15 has a gov’t spec attached to it, pretty much every company that makes firearms makes an AR-15, and they’re all substantially identical.

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.eeEnglish
      58·
      5 months ago

      I have some bad news for you.

      An AR-15 is really only good for wartime scenarios (and mass-murder). If your goal is self defense, you have chosen a terrible gun that limits your mobility and cannot protect you at close range. A handgun is vastly superior for the purpose of self-defense.

      Not that your choice of gun matters here. The choice to have a gun at all actually increases your risk of being victim of a violent crime, and that’s just the odds for you. Having a gun in your house at all greatly increases the risk that you or someone in your home will die accidentally, or by suicide. Those odds are greater than those of any violent lunatic breaking into your home and murdering anyone in it.

      If you want a gun because you expect to be at war with tyrants, more power to you. If your goal is to minimize the risk of harm to you and your family, unless you have some actual enemies you expect to have to deal with, you are better of without a gun in your home, or at least not one that is easy to access.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.eeEnglish
        41·
        5 months ago

        I have an AR-15. It’s a perfectly fine rifle for hunting medium sized game at ranges of up to about 300y (which is a longer shot than you’ll ever get in the woods). It’s the preferred rifle for people that are trying to thin out coyote packs or sounders of feral pigs.

        Fun fact, did you know that having a sink in your home increases the odds that someone in your home will die of drowning? Probably outta get rid of those.

      • FireTower@lemmy.worldEnglish
        41·
        5 months ago

        The choice to have a gun at all actually increases your risk of being victim of a violent crime, and that’s just the odds for you. Having a gun in your house at all greatly increases the risk that you or someone in your home will die accidentally, or by suicide. Those odds are greater than those of any violent lunatic breaking into your home and murdering anyone in it.

        Aside from poking fun at the notion a violent home invasion is something to contrast with violent crime, there’s a serious problem here. In the study of criminal justice (and many social sciences) it is nearly impossible in most cases to separate correlation and causation. This is due to the difficulties in setting control groups and the many possible factors that may influence these events.

        A person cognisant that they are at increased risk of violent crime might feel inclined to acquire a firearm. This doesn’t necessarily mean the purchase caused the victimization. That is like saying doing chemotherapy increases your risk of dying of cancer. And someone experiencing suicidal ideation might purchase a firearm to commit the act. Putting this notion once again on its head.

      • Olhonestjim@lemmy.worldEnglish
        53·
        5 months ago

        Thank you for your assertions. It’s always good to hear from an expert. You’re right. It could never happen here. Everything is fine.

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.caEnglish
      28·
      5 months ago

      Lol, i need a gun to protect myself from others with guns

      Aside from a ban meaning you don’t need one anymore. If you’re ever in a position where you need a gun, then it’s already too late to protect yourself

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
        6·
        5 months ago

        If you’re ever in a position where you need a gun, then it’s already too late to protect yourself

        Someone has never heard of concealed carry. Nor have they ever heard something go bump in the night.

        • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.caEnglish
          14·
          5 months ago

          Oh yay it’s in your pocket, you will certainly be able to get it out, loaded, and take the safety off without the person threatening you noticing

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
            8·
            5 months ago

            Who pocket carries?

            Who carries a pistol unloaded?

            Who carries a pistol with a manual safety?

            I’m not trying to be insulting. Your points are valid and worthy of consideration. However, the issues you have raised have long since been addressed.

            Typically, concealed carriers use “IWB” (“inside waistband”) holsters to keep their handguns at the ready. Not a pocket. It’s actually very easy to draw from an IWB holster.

            All modern pistols are specifically designed to be safely carried with a round chambered. Some training doctrine calls for handguns to remain loaded but unchambered. Israeli soldiers carry without a round chambered, but they are the exception. The broad consensus now is that your carry/duty pistol should be loaded, chambered, and ready to fire.

            External safeties were common in older pistol models intended for duty use, where the user might be on horseback, and they commonly used a belt holster with a large flap that required both hands to reholster. The thinking was that a safety made sense when the user has the gun in their hand, but their attention was on something other than shooting. For example, if a cavalry officer’s horse were to start bucking, they were trained to immediately thumb on the safety and tend to their mount with pistol still in hand, rather than try to take the time to reholster.

            Modern pistols are designed to be used with modern holsters. A modern holster protects the trigger from unintentional discharge. As soon as a carry gun is drawn, it needs to be ready to fire, so very few carry guns actually have manually operated safeties anymore. Modern duty holsters are designed for one-handed reholstering.

            The internal safety features of modern handguns are intended to block the striker from hitting the cartridge in case of a mechanical malfunction. They are not intended to prevent firing when the trigger is pulled.

            Please, ask reasonable questions and make reasonable observations. This is a serious subject. Please don’t treat it like a joke.

            • HelixDab2@lemm.eeEnglish
              2·
              5 months ago

              Who carries a pistol with a manual safety?

              Pretty much everyone that carries a 1911 derivative, or a Beretta 92. There are a bunch of others, but most people that do defensive carry, as you imply, are using striker-fired pistols, and are carrying in condition 0.

              To add to this - for people that practice, .8 seconds is considered a competitive time (e.g., a good, fast time) to draw from concealment and get a single shot in the A-zone–center mass–at 7 yards. A competitive time for draw and 6 shots in the A zone at 6 yards (AKA “Bill drill”) is about 3 seconds. Anyone that’s no longer in the novice class in IDPA should be getting draw-to-shot times of 1 second or less.

      • Olhonestjim@lemmy.worldEnglish
        61·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, maybe you’re right. The cops will keep us all safe from fascists.

        Too bad about Ukraine and how they fell in 3 days when the Russians invaded. After all, if you need weapons to defend yourself, it’s already too late. Everybody knows that. The best policy is always to immediately surrender and hope they decide to be nice to you.

        • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.caEnglish
          37·
          5 months ago

          Ukraine and Russia were fighting for a decade before that

          If you think your easy bake rifle is enough to prevent a foreign invasion that overwhelms the US military then you’re ignorant enough to be a gun supporter

          • Olhonestjim@lemmy.worldEnglish
            61·
            5 months ago

            Oh thank you, what an excellent point you’ve made. Truly, you have destroyed the argument for self defense.

            I never suggested we would be invaded by foreigners. Nor did I suggest fighting cops and the military, did I?

            I said fascists. Yup, I sure did. Reading is fundamental.