Speculatory AR15 purchase ahead of any upcoming bans?

[gotboostvr]

If you and I had switched places for even one day, you would find more than ten things legal in AZ within a reasonable amount of time that are against the laws of NY...

And that's not at all a small part of why I moved to AZ, from even the relatively free state of Ohio.

You'd be hard pressed to find anything that flys in NYC that's not already legal here that I actually give a hoot about.

 

[GEM]

We have a fundamental disagreement on this.

Here is a proposed law for you:

1. We support the 2nd Amendment. We do not want to take away the guns from sportsmen and women and hunters (as Senator Klobuchar said, we do not want to take Uncle Dick's rifle from his deer blind.
2. For gun safety and make our streets safe, all long arms must be kept locked up and unloaded. Ammunition needs to be kept in a separate locked location.
3. Handguns can only be used for competitions and hunting. Said guns must be kept locked up at a recognized sporting club to be checked for competition, practice and the range and for a licensed hunt.
4. Of course, there is no role for semi automatic higher capacity long arms in hunting. They are banned and must be turned in. Bolt action rifles will suffice. Semi auto shotguns will be allow but only with unmodifiable two round capacities.

Think these laws exist elsewhere in the world? Yep. Do they allow all the sporting and hunting uses. Yep. Do they make the 2nd Amendment useless for its intended purposes - yes - for the most part. Certainly for self-defense.

Thus varmints, competitions, hunts, etc. are irrelevant. They can be handled and allowed with an almost total abrogation of useful gun rights. How many folks in urban areas want to have a self-defense gun and will never worry about a prairie dog or shoot a duck?

 

[The_Quartermaster]

LMAO, a fallacy argument.

 

[Varminterror]

Here is a proposed law for you:

1. We support the 2nd Amendment. We do not want to take away the guns from sportsmen and women and hunters (as Senator Klobuchar said, we do not want to take Uncle Dick's rifle from his deer blind.
2. For gun safety and make our streets safe, all long arms must be kept locked up and unloaded. Ammunition needs to be kept in a separate locked location.
3. Handguns can only be used for competitions and hunting. Said guns must be kept locked up at a recognized sporting club to be checked for competition, practice and the range and for a licensed hunt.
4. Of course, there is no role for semi automatic higher capacity long arms in hunting. They are banned and must be turned in. Bolt action rifles will suffice. Semi auto shotguns will be allow but only with unmodifiable two round capacities.

Think these laws exist elsewhere in the world? Yep. Do they allow all the sporting and hunting uses. Yep. Do they make the 2nd Amendment useless for its intended purposes - yes - for the most part. Certainly for self-defense.

Thus varmints, competitions, hunts, etc. are irrelevant. They can be handled and allowed with an almost total abrogation of useful gun rights. How many folks in urban areas want to have a self-defense gun and will never worry about a prairie dog or shoot a duck?

Again:

We have a fundamental disagreement on this.

Plainly, you seem to have a failure of understanding of the words “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Your devaluation of folks (and our God given rights protected and guaranteed by the US Constitution) who don’t live in urban areas as irrelevant in your calculus is embarrassing, frankly, but is exactly WHY the constitution guarantees our rights against folks like yourself who would infringe upon them. I have no interest in entertaining your proposal to “handle” my rights.

 

[AlexanderA]

Plainly, you seem to have a failure of understanding of the words “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Your devaluation of folks (and our God given rights protected and guaranteed by the US Constitution) who don’t live in urban areas as irrelevant in your calculus is embarrassing, frankly, but is exactly WHY the constitution guarantees our rights against folks like yourself who would infringe upon them. I have no interest in entertaining your proposal to “handle” my rights.

You have to look at the historical background of the 2nd Amendment. Clearly, hunting, target shooting, etc., were not issues in 1791. The RKBA was a civic right, targeted to community self defense and, by extension, personal self defense. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting.

And let's stop using the phrases "God given rights" or "natural rights." Nothing was given to us from on high. Every right was wrested by people from their rulers, and if they want to keep those rights, the people have to be eternally vigilant. And, if we're talking about "natural rights" (which don't exist), then the essentials of life -- air, water, food, shelter, medical care -- would come ahead of guns. So let's not go down that rabbit hole.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

-_-

Nobody is arguing that this is about hunting, FFS. I simply said that the AR15 can also be used for hunting among a bunch of other things so it's not just a niche rifle for SHTF only when I corrected that person.

 

[GEM]

Ha,my proposal was totally misinterpreted. My point was that a law could be written that would allow the sportsman and varmint hunter to have guns in a manner that would make the prime purpose of the 2nd Amendment useless. It is not about hunting or sports. That my hypothetical proposal was taken as my world view is exactly the problem of those who bring up the sporting uses. YOU just don't get it.

As far as God Given Rights - who cares when you post cliches as you didn't get the point at all. About Urban folks - pragmatically the increase in gun ownership is driven by SD and not prairie dogs. The biggest advance in gun rights has been in the shall issue and now constitutional carry movements, not in an increase in prairie dogs. Shotgun sales have been pretty much flat over the past years while handguns and AR rifles have soared - why? NOT for prairie dogs.

If one is outraged, one should understand the issue and hypotheticals (which have been applied overseas) that would allow sports and kill the 2nd Amendment's purposes.

 

[theotherwaldo]

I am not a fan of the term 'God-given rights'.
I prefer 'rights that are not subject to government removal or reinterpretation'... .

 

[Ignition Override]

The Czech Republic allows a permit for owning and using semi-automatic, centerfire rifles (Youtube has some examples).

They then allow ( iirc ) a standard, detailed process to own and Carry a handgun for self-defense. Such citizens don't need to be wealthy or well-connected.

As there seem to be a Much lower percentage of criminal acts committed by such law-abiding citizens (compared to the US), ---unless--- I'm mistaken about the percentage noted....

....the guns are not the problem.

 

[Varminterror]

There’s nothing difficult to “get” about this silliness. YOUR hypothetical proposal assumes that the guaranteed “right to keep and bear arms” only need apply to defensive arms owned by urban citizens because the sporting arms market almost 2 1/2 centuries after its drafting is larger for AR’s than shotguns. That makes perfect sense, right? The drafters of the Bill of Rights knew that someday Glocks would outsell Browning A5’s…

Would you not think in the 18th century, contemporary to its drafting, that more firearms might be owned and used for hunting purpose than for urban home defense? Famously, Colonial Militiamen carried their HUNTING rifles in the war which begot the Constitution, so it sure seems as though analogous applicability would suggest quite the contrary to your claim.

The second amendment constitution doesn’t say citizens have a right to defend their homes… making up BS concessions that a “sporting arms concession” should be made to infringe upon rights protected by our constitution is just asinine…

 

[CapnMac]

The AR type rifles dominate 3-gun matches, multi-gun, and service rifle competition.

The "straight pull" (e.g. "gasless" non self loading) versions are hugely popular in British KD shooting competition.

Fifty years is a long time to develop a following.

 

[AlexanderA]

I am not a fan of the term 'God-given rights'.
I prefer 'rights that are not subject to government removal or reinterpretation'... .

Anything* in the Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment, can be changed by further amendment. Difficult, but not impossible. So there are no immutable rights. We have to be eternally vigilant.

*Actually, there is one thing that cannot be changed by the normal amendment process: the equal representation of states in the Senate.

 

[theotherwaldo]

Anything* in the Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment, can be changed by further amendment. Difficult, but not impossible. So there are no immutable rights. We have to be eternally vigilant.

*Actually, there is one thing that cannot be changed by the normal amendment process: the equal representation of states in the Senate.

Not without the consent of the governed... .

 

[rdnktrkr]

Recently I saw a complete rifle at Bear Creek Arsenal for $350, a LGS had a complete PSA for $400 and a name brand for $450, IF you decide to sell your AR I think the name brand would recoup the price difference, I think the BCA and PSA will shoot as good as the lower end name brands
Living in GA, purchasing one for political reasons doesn't make sense but purchasing one for fun and accurate shooting is a great idea.
As stated earlier a couple of extra parts is not a bad idea and doesn't take up a lot of room, I like to add a torque driver for the times someone has a loose screw, (not the shooter), I've used it more than once, a spareI BCG, I've used it 2 times for fellow shooters and then they replace it and as always I like to have a brass rod for squibs or whatever..
Good luck in your decision

 

[wesmonster]

I have a BCM upper on a Rock River Arms lower, probably my best AR, definitely my most expensive.
But I think WAAY back I paid kover $500 for just the completeBCM upper minus a bcg, so NOT the cheapest or 'best bang for the buck'.
I have lots of uppers & lowers from Palmetto State Armory (local for me) and Anderson, my top choices for budget builds.
I say the S&W is a pretty safe bet for a complete rifle, they have a good track record with no proprietary furniture.

While most of my ARs are scoped, my BCM has a fixed front sight with a Blitzkrieg hi viz chevron post with a red dot and a Troy DOA flip up rear sight. Red dot co-witnessed with the front sight for fast targeting, and when I'm shooting for precision, I flip up the rear.

Forgot to add, I also have a Bear Creek Arsenal 6.5Grendel 20" upper with a stainless steel barrel, great shooter, no issues and at the time was about $50 cheaper than a PSA 6.5G upper. No complaints and IMHO the absolute cheapest you'll find for AR uppers.

 

[Cacas ex Fortuna]

Part of my 3 decades in the Army was done as an Armorer, company, regiment, and depot.
I cant stand ARs. They were the best choice for wide, daughter, and grand daughter.
So we built 3, one for each.
Ive showed over 100 peeps how to build them, its easy.

When they come for them, and they will. They dont even know they are here.
Besides I answer the door with the caliber 30, M1.
Just in case its time to say "Get off my Lawn"

 

[Rexster]

Would I buy an AR/M4, with future bans in mind? No. I have enough of them, and, am not that big of a fan of the system, anyway. I was trained to be a “carbine unit” officer, as part of my police patrol career, with a personally-owned Colt AR15A2 Govt Carbine. I do continue to own and maintain familiarity with the weapon system.

Moreover, I dislike a safety/selector lever that points DOWNWARD when it is ready to fire. I have other weapon systems that are ready to fire when the safety lever is pointed AT the target/enemy/opponent, and have FAR more training reps, with that safety lever orientation.

 

[Smaug]

Would I buy an AR/M4, with future bans in mind? No. I have enough of them, and, am not that big of a fan of the system, anyway. I was trained to be a “carbine unit” officer, as part of my police patrol career, with a personally-owned Colt AR15A2 Govt Carbine. I do continue to own and maintain familiarity with the weapon system.

...but this is about me, not you. I don't have an AR of any kind.
What do you think of that? Got to have one just because or just in case, or take a pass and get something I might get more enjoyment from?

 

[Varminterror]

I don't have an AR of any kind.
What do you think of that? Got to have one just because or just in case, or take a pass and get something I might get more enjoyment from?

If you had no interest in playing tennis, would you buy a tennis racket, just to have one? If you had no interest in golf, would you buy a set of clubs just to have them? Do you own a cricket bat?

I’ve had literally hundreds of AR’s come to my workbench from folks who bought mil-spec-ish carbines because they just felt like they should have an AR, but then nearly immediately realized they had no use for them. In many cases, even discussing modifications to other lengths, cartridges, or configurations couldn’t yield a rifle in which they’d actually find utility, so they ended up selling the rifle rather than modifying it. Not everyone needs, has use for, or wants an AR.

But there are two truths to answer your initial question: 1) there is no sense in buying an AR right now to be ahead of an imagined forthcoming ban, and 2) such a ban would not create a need for an AR you don’t already need, even if it did materialize. So buy an AR if you want one, because you want one, not because you think you won’t be able to buy one someday.

But since it does seem you support the principle that banning AR’s would be an undue infringement upon the rights of law-abiding gun owners like yourself, even if you don’t have a need or want for an AR, please do write your elected representatives at all levels to voice your disapproval of any such bans or other non-sensical infringements - including invasions of privacy via indirect means such as purchase and shipment tracking.

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

I am not a fan of the term 'God-given rights'.
I prefer 'rights that are not subject to government removal or reinterpretation'... .

It’s your God-given right to call it whatever you want.

 

[Robert]

5 pages of speculation and what ifs seems like more than enough...