Need?

.an individual has started a thread listing guns he thinks....based on his opinion....we as gun owners do not need


You summed it up yourself. It was the author's opinion. We all have one(won't go there today) and thankfully they differ, otherwise for the most part, online gun forums would die out.

Your thread is a prime example of what's wrong in the world today, and the biggest reason for arguing on the internet........intolerance. Intolerance to other's religious beliefs, intolerance to people of other races and ethnic originality, and intolerance to the opinions of others. So many demand respect for their own opinion, but refuse to respect the opinions of others. So some random poster has the opinion some guns need to be discontinued.....why and how does this affect you and your opinion?
 
Geeeeeeez. The guy started a thread about guns he thinks are useless and everyone and his brother-in-law starts attacking him.

Lighten up, everyone. Stop reading more into it than there really is.
 
Back in the days when the threat of gun bans were not as big or as constant a threat as it is now, we talked a lot about what you needed, and didn't need, for this or that use.

Never once did it cross our minds that saying "you don't need" ="ban it". We simply did not think that way. When we said "you don't need..." what was always meant was "don't waste your money buying ...."

There was always a reason given, always something like "you don't need A, because B, and C do the same job, B is cheaper, and C does it better" or something like that.

Its a sad sign of the times, and a result of our constant exposure to the toxic venom spewed endlessly through the media, that some people assume any discussion of what one needs is an automatic call for a ban on what we don't need.

THAT IS THE ENEMY'S mindset. Make no mistake about it, the people calling for bans (on anything) are the enemies of liberty and free will. THEY are making the choice FOR everyone.

One argument I like to use when I run into one of the "you don't need it, so it must be banned" types is the Minimum Wage.

Since minimum wage is the govt sanction on how much money you need to make, then everything above that is excess to need.

So, I will entertain the thought of allowing the ban of what you think I don't need, if you will extend me the same privilege.

And I don't think you need any more money than minimum wage. ALL your excess should be banned, and perhaps maybe you ought to be punished for "hoarding" money?

Somehow, they never seem to agree with that.
:rolleyes:
 
I actually enjoyed cigarettes lol.

Now I don't smoke them... Not allowed to by many "little" bans here and there. Now you can't get some jobs if you smoke cigarettes at all, even behind your woodshed at home.

I do smoke a tobacco pipe, which is a way different form of smoking...
I honestly really liked unwinding with a cigarette, I know they're bad for me, but was my choice. That has been taken away from me, I don't have that choice.

I really like fireworks, I don't need them. I am careful with them... Next year, that choice will be taken away from me.

Politicians want to force medical treatment upon us, even if we don't want it.

The list goes on, the trend goes on. It's not leading to more freedoms.

You can smoke marijuana legally in more places, the only reason is? Tax revenue cash cow.
 
I don't see anything inherently wrong with someone expressing an opinion on what people "need".

It only becomes distasteful when that same person seeks to apply their opinion of "need" on others in an arbitrary manner.

None of us probably "need" more than a fraction of the guns actually we own: I could probably cover all my essential roles with two of mine, if well chosen.

Expressing an opinion on "need" does not necessarily mean, however, that they are refuting the notion of "want".

Let's be honest: a very high percentage of what most of us own falls squarely in the "want", not "need" camp.
 
Nobody needs one of those super-powered repeating rifles. You know, the ones that have those supercharged bullets that can take out an airplane or a car engine...I think they call them 30-06. And, Savage (tells you the state-of-mind of these gun owners) even makes some of these hyper-powered rifles with blind (i.e. hidden) magazines so law enforcement can't tell what kind of bullets you are using or how many you have in your rifle.
 
Need cuts both ways.
I tell people that I NEED access to 30 round magazines and to an AR-style rifle for 2 reasons:
1. If I'm called up to help the militia, I might need to provide my own weapon, in which case for logistical reasons, the state would need me to have a weapon of same caliber, magazine design, and parts compatibility as their existing main arms so that I'm not a logistical logjam hindering their performance while I"m trying to ASSIST the government defend the state.
2. If I'm ever called up to resist a tyrannical local government, I will need a weapon of the same caliber, magazine capacity, etc so that I could be best equipped to RESIST with a reasonable chance of success.

So, do I need an AR-pattern rifle or a 30 round magazine? I might not for my day to day life, but the government NEEDS me to have access to both for me to fulfill my duties as a free citizen under the second amendment.

just sayin...
 
So, do I need an AR-pattern rifle or a 30 round magazine?

OK, you convinced me - you can keep your AR rifle, but turn in your AK, FAL, M1A, PTR-91, Tavor, and your evil Glock!
 
It only becomes distasteful when that same person seeks to apply their opinion of "need" on others in an arbitrary manner.
This reminds me of an annoying situation I had in 2013. We were sold out of AR-15's. Everybody was. The only way to get one at that time was to pay insane prices on the secondary market.

A young guy came in asking for one. I explained the situation. The conversation came around to hunting. He wanted a rifle for Georgia whitetail. His friends all told him he needed an AR-15 for that.

My response was, "you don't need an AR for deer hunting, you just..."

That got taken out of context by two nosy and mouthy onlookers, who launched into a tirade about how I was cozying up to Michael Bloomberg. Yeesh....

(The young guy ended up with a Ruger American, a very good scope, and plenty of ammunition, and he was happy to be spending far less than he expected.)
 
You know, I have a list of things that I think are useless simply because I (as in me & myself) have no use for them. What I am really trying to say is that I have no use nor desire to own certain guns and that anyone else is free to have what they want. I just think the guy didn't choose his words correctly.

We all have bucket lists of guns that we think are "useless," and that's why we all drive different kinds of cars, wear different kinds of clothes and listen to different kinds of music.

I would tend to think the guy made up that list either because he felt the designs were (in his opinion) stupid, or (also in his opinion) didn't fulfill any niche that wasn't already covered by something else.

So half the posters jump all over his case thinking he is advocating the banning of these guns. How knee jerk is that?
 
Back
Top