TexasCHLforum.com

RottenApple wrote:

howdy wrote:

JALLEN wrote:I remember back all these years ago in the late 60's, when my then wife's twin sister's boyfriend, later my bro-in-law, a SEAL officer who had led patrols in VN, was heaping praise on a weapon he referred to as a "Stoner." I kinda wish they had stuck with that and let it go from there.

Quiz #2 (Not fair if JALLEN answers) Why was it call a "Stoner"

Designed by Eugene Stoner.

So, if the name stuck "Stoner". You can go to Colorado and get stoned but can not buy a "Stoner"..

"Need" is irrelevant. There aren't many non-LEO/military that "need" a military-style semi-auto rifle.

Now, "want." That is altogether different. If you don't want one, then don't waste the money. If you do, then you get to decide what price point makes it worth the want.

Because if you do not have one you are not cool. ARs are major cool factor.

Anygunanywhere

They are Sporting Rifles NOT an "assault" rifle. I refuse to use anti-gun lingo.

I asked a friend once who owned one that very same question.

Him - Have you ever shot one?
Me - No
Him - Ask me again after you shoot one.

A few months later I had the chance to shoot one.

2 weeks after that I was a proud owner.

AB

I own a whole lot of stuff I don't really "need". The first falicy is believing one must "need" a gun in order to "justify" buying one. First, you buy a self defense type gun and hope you never "need" it. Second, one should never feel they have to "justify" buying a firearm any more than they have to justify buying milk.

You don't really "need" a TV. Do you own one? How about those sheets for your bed? You don't really "need" sheets for the bed. The bed works just fine without sheets.

How about this: They are just plain fun to shoot! You do own guns that are fun and not just functional, right? Well, an AR-15 will almost certainly jump to the top of your fun list.

Gordie Howe wrote:I have a CHL, and several semiauto 9mm handguns, a few revolvers, two defensive 12 gauge shotguns, and a Taurus Circuit Judge, 45lc/410 shotgun/carbine/revolver.

As prices have skyrocketed on assault rifles, it seems a steep purchase. Why would I need an assault rifle, besides being angry my right to purchase one may be taken away.?

I reside in a Houston subburb. I do think riots will happen when the economy collapes; so do I need one when an entire Section 8 Housing Project invades my home or is that extreeme paranoia ?. I am answering my own question, maybe.

I believe the Judge is already banned in California, maybe some other places, as a revolving shotgun. What's a defensive shotgun? Sounds like an "assault" shotgun to me. In Colorado the proposed bill, unless amended, would ban just about all pump and semi-auto shotguns. And who knows what will happen with semi-auto handguns. But I think the whole point is that free people determine their own needs, not the government, so if you don't think you need one, and don't just plain want one, then you don't.

It seems that many folks in our society have forgotten that "need" is a relative term. If you are given 5 minutes to pack a small bag and leave everything else behind, what would you put in that bag? I am not diabetic, so I don't need insulin, but there are some folks on this board who do need that. I don't have asthma but my wife does, so we NEED her inhaler, so that goes in our bag. I don't like the idea of the government and Washington do-gooders deciding what I "need".
The second point is that "need" changes. Today is a warm sunny day, so I don't "Need" a coat. Within a day or two that could change, and it could change dramatically enough so that having a warm coat could possibly be life saving.
When politicians and anti-gunners say "you don't need an AR", they are arguing that we don't need a coat because it is warm outside. What if the political climate drastically changes? I am a big fan of the 12 gauge for most of my defensive purposes, and as I sit here today I don't "Need" an AR. If the political climate changes enough where I could be killed or imprisoned for my faith, race, political views, or some other unconstitutional reason, having an AR could be just as life saving as having a warm coat in a blizzard. Personally, I believe that anyone who does not prepare for bad weather is foolish.

With AR/AK, I can place a bullet on its intended target at quite distance. However, my hunting rifle is more accurate at 4X the range If the AR is an evil killing machine, then that Tikka is a terrorizing nightmare for bogies.
Where is the common sense?

First: I believe you should remove the phrase "assault rifle" from your vocabulary and just call the thing what it is, which is a "rifle."

Second: it is a bill of rights, not a bill of needs.

Why do I need an assault rifle? I don't feel its absolutely necessary, but it does make for a great tool in certain situations as opposed to using other weapons such as handguns or even shotguns when dealing with multiple intruders. I love my 870 tactical with mesa stock but if a couple of guys are breaking in the house I would like to throw down a lot of rifle velocity rounds to even my chances. Thats one of the reasons why Im considering buying my first one. Plus, I remember how fun it was qualifying with M-16s in ROTC!

bdickens wrote:First: I believe you should remove the phrase "assault rifle" from your vocabulary and just call the thing what it is, which is a "rifle."

Second: it is a bill of rights, not a bill of needs.

The AR-15 5.56mm rifle is a lightweight, air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed, shoulder-fired weapon designed for semiautomatic fire, to paraphrase the US Air Force arms instructors.

howdy wrote:

JALLEN wrote:I remember back all these years ago in the late 60's, when my then wife's twin sister's boyfriend, later my bro-in-law, a SEAL officer who had led patrols in VN, was heaping praise on a weapon he referred to as a "Stoner." I kinda wish they had stuck with that and let it go from there.

Quiz #2 (Not fair if JALLEN answers) Why was it call a "Stoner"

Because whomever designed the rifle must of been smoking Pot ...

As seen in another thread (viewtopic.php?f=94&t=65004&p=796748&hilit=parks#p796748" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;):

brainman wrote:I can't take credit for this quote, but I like it.

I don't need an AR15 any more than Rosa Parks needed to sit at the front of that bus.