Is legitimate reason why civilians so desperately require assault rifles?

This stupid point is brought up so often that it's time for a dedicated discussion.

to form a militia capable of combating tyrants.

Because without such weapons, most men would be forced to deal with the reality that they are powerless cuckolds. Owning these weapons allows them to continue living in a fantasy world of toxic masculinity.

If the US were to ever fall into the hands of a tyrant, how would you ever be combat against things like this?

pardon my retarded grammar.

Speak for yourself child. I hunt my own food and defend my own home. I know you don't have the capability to do either of these things but I just thought id drop in and let you know that everyone isnt as impotent as you are.

Fpbp

Yes, the second amendment was passed to allay concerns over having a full standing army which was not the European norm at the time. Federalists acknowledged the anti Federalist position that such a situation could lead to another Cromwell's New Model Army.

The compromise is that states and citizens can muster against the federal standing army. It's really not a hard concept to understand.

Saying that Billy Bob and his AR-15 couldn't defeat the US Military misses the point of Police Power. No one is arguing that the US couldn't just wipe out its citizens effortlessly. The question is why. The point of the state is to have a degree of control over citizens. Sure you could firebomb a few thousand militia members but enforcing day-to-day rule isn't easy when every citizen can fight back with guerilla tactics.

Hypothetically you would attack the personnel that run the fueling and supply stations that it uses. Or their families

If it's semi-automatic, it's not an assault rifle by definition. At least learn the terms before trying to argue. -_-

Hypothetically, a tyrant would just nuke everyone if it saved his own life.

Come onnnnn dude
This has been settled a million and ten times
You can't win guerilla warfare with tanks and drone strikes

We have enough Vietnamese immigrants to deal with that readily enough.

Also OP I get you don't agree with it. I think my above post explains what people who say that don't get. In order to continue their position they would have to say that they are ok with not being able to combat a tyrannical state. The response would likely be "that would never happen."

History and the nature of some humans tells us otherwise.

You could still do those things with a standard handgun, shotgun, or rifle. American men like to pretend that they are brave action hero stars, so they buy pseudo military weapons in an effort to act out that fantasy. At least be honest about it and stop deluding yourself.

Is this supposed to be an argument?

The thing is that at that point, the country is lost anyways
Might as well go 1776

Guns exist to keep the erosion of rights at bay so that they would be forced to destroy the country to get what they want

Here, I did it for you

The fact that government doesn't want you to have it is justification enough.

>Assault rife

Bait

Same reason you fags need your own gay groceries

Go read a constitution nigger

...

a militia is not a conventional force. it will not combat a conventional force using conventional warfare. a guerrilla militia force will use the armament at hand to acquire additional resources to combat a stronger opposition.
for example:
>a militia is former
>the militia ambushes a conventional light infantry unit
>the militia acquires the infantry's anti armor ordnance
>the militia ambushes a conventional armored infantry unit
>rinse, repeat

.. but that isn't an assault rifle. No assault rifles were used, and such rifles have been massively restricted to the point one might as well consider them outright banned since the 20s. They are a collector's rarity selling for more than a new car in private auctions, and are virtually never used in crimes.

Why do lying kikes only lie to push their gun control agenda when white people die? Coincidentally. All those shootings in Chimpcago is just another weekend to a liberal.

It's a semi-automatic rifle. Jesus christ people there's nothing fucking special about it.

formed*

The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle.

this

that's a really retarded graph
why do simpletons keep posting these simplified arguments that mean nothing

They don't trust the american goverment and with reason. They understand that 2nd is the only thing protecting them and they believe that a few casualties here and there are worth it.

same way the Vietcong and Taliban did

if some one is going to shoot me with one I'd rather have one than not.

Yeah, how would that be possible? Tell me again how Vietnam went and why the middle east is still not taken over by your government.

If it's retarded, it should be easy for you to show the logical flaw(s) in it.

And that's without generals having their families dismembered in their homes.

The AR-15 is not an assault rifle. It's a semi-automatic rifle and has the exact same killing potential as the Mini-14 I have pictured here. The differences are entirely cosmetic.

the right to bear arms implies the right to any arm I want. It doesn't specify any specific type of arm. the NFA is unconstitutional

>assault rifle
OP is, as usual, a faggot. Hiding behind a meme flag, no less.

This guy gets it

This, why are people so eternally retarded and willfully ignorant about this shit

Does it? So which well regulated militia do you belong to?

i live in canada, should i get one of those mini 14s? they are the only legal battle rifle we can own, besides the norinco m14. are mini 14s as inaccurate as some say?

SHALL

the supreme court btfo that argument sweetie

NOT

Well, it is a damn good weapon for what you need it for in the US. I fired that thing, it's pretty neat.

the constitution clearly states that the PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, NOT the MILITIA. there is a fucking comma there for a reason you illiterate.

its not an assault rifle you dumb shit its just a semi auto rifle learn the difference an assault rifle is a select fire rifle that can fire on full auto or semi auto and burst fire now don't you feel dumb not knowing the difference.

What requires belonging to a militia?
Certainly not the second amendment, unless you have threading comprehension of a third grader.

That is a standard rifle.

Mini-14's are not "battle rifles". They are chambered in intermediary rounds and thus "carbines". M14's (like the Norinco M305), chambered in 7.62x51, are battle rifles.

I'd rather wait for the new AR-18 derivative that's coming out (sub 1k maple pesos!) and see how that does.

This is why I NEED...

Oh good, so you are familiar with the part of the decision which states that it is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.

>i have no counter argument so i'm gonna point out OP's mistake again

The "militia", in the parlance of the time, was all men of able body and mind between two ages that I can't remember off the top of my head.

Because full auto is a fun way to burn a lot of money really fast.

sorry about the semantics, i'm not a /k/ommando and my experience is limited to lever action .22s and bolt actions. i do want something better for home defense however. how is the accuracy on a mini 14?

That rifle in your picture is commonly used for gophers, coyotes and other pest.

17 and 45

A tyrant will not follow the constitution he will try to destoy it. The people will fight to keep it and their rights.

Stryker is garbage.

Just lure it offroad and it will be useless.

For home defense, I'd suggest getting one of those 13" shotguns like pic related. You can get them for cheap and any shot size of #4 Buck or larger is adequate for home defense.

I use to be all for gun ownership

but fuck man, there are loads of school shootings in the USA (compared to the UK)

Thanks, Ameribro.

...

Get a vz.58

...

There are constant acts of tyranny and violations of our rights in this country, and yet I never really see gun fags out there fighting for our liberty.

Not a bad option, but if it's a non-restricted model, it'll have an 18.5" barrel which is a bit awkward for clearing most homes.

for fun

point it out to me. I know you just read what you typed off wikipedia you goddamn faggot

imagine if Brits had AR-15s
>be rape gang
>rape
>get killed by an angry militia
>that's that
But Brits don't have guns. They have no option but to wait for the police to sort it out. And they don't. And that's why the HORRIFIC BETRAYAL OF 1400 CHILDREN happened.

i've already got an over and under .22 and 12 gauge, as well as a double barrel 12 gauge. i was looking for a semi auto over a shotty.
looks badass, pretty much an SKS or what?

How do restrictions on overall/barrel length etc. work in Canada? I know of the explicitly banned rifles thing that includes the G11 but not much more.

shit was funny tho
>how would you ever be combat?

Do we need to spell it out for you?

anything barrel length under 470 mm is restricted, so no sawed offs, no handguns, no SMGs, etc.

Barrel length mostly matters for handguns and semi-automatic centerfire long-guns.
Manually operated (lever/pump/bolt/break-action) or rimfire long-guns (incl. semi-auto's) only need to be over ~26" to be non-restricted.
AR-15's are specifically named as Restricted, so nobody cares about barrel length and just about 100% of the AR's in Canada are what you'd call an SBR in the US.

I literally copy and pasted it from the ruling.

...

It's because the people that want gun control know absolutely nothing about guns. They think the ar-15 is the scariest gun out there because it's black and similar to what the military uses. Liberals are fucking pathetic.

>No sawed offs
Depends. You can cut a barrel down to 18.5" (say, from a 24"), but no shorter. If the barrel is manufactured from the get-go as a 13" barrel, it's fine.

>No handguns
Handguns are completely lawful as long as they are not .25 or .32 caliber and have a barrel of >106mm. Magazine capacity limit for handguns is 10 rounds.

> Is legitimate reason why civilians so desperately require assault rifles?

>require
>need

Are you implying that an individual can only have what they need, and no more?

The only answer for why you need a gun should be "because I want it."

You don't need a reason to buy anything, especially something that is your Constitutional right to own.

tbf with all this other shit thats going on right now... I would be sure to arm myself even more

Then bullpups like the Tavor would be a good choice for home defense right?

so a .22 revolver is legal? decent, i always thought the one i'd inherited from my grandpa was restricted

would be fucking ideal, unfortunately it's about double cost wise what i'd pay for a mini 14 or a norinco m14. maybe when i'm less poor.

The Tavor shoots gas in your face, has a terrible trigger and is expensive as hell.

The mini 14 is a perfectly capable rifle for most purposes.
It's not a sniper rifle so your groups won't be good if you go too far out.
Otherwise, it's reliable, easy to work on, doesn't attract too much attention and you look like you came from The A-Team if you get it in stainless.
Personally, I think they're cool.
And, yes, they were designed to be battle rifles - a replacement for military rifles.
Ruger was too late and the M16 ended up being what was chosen by the military.
Seen from this standpoint it was designed to be a battle rifle, though it was only ever used by police forces.
I'm going to get one as my Rooftop Korean rifle.

A "Restricted" license is just as easy to get as a Non-Restricted license. The ones you can't get are the various kinds of Prohibited licenses (12.X).

Reminder that you can get a semi automatic rifle fairly easily on a hunting license, and that there's no restriction on magazine capacity. Due to how the bureaucracy and rubbery laws work it might be hard to get a license for a good gun depending on where you live.

It was an example; I've obviously never handled one.

>has a terrible trigger
Does this really matter all that much in CQC though?

I'm just saying it's not a great value. I'd legitimately rather get a Kel-Tec.

Got myself this .300 cal beauty on this christmas, love those AR polymer stocks.
God bless USA bros

Shoot all the dudes around it and then rush it with molotov cocktails

No reason to believe you're wrong. I've no idea about the details and logistics.

DESU if it were possible I'd want a suppressed Beretta CX4 for home defense judging by my admittedly lacking arm chair weapons enthusiast expertise.

So we can keep the first amendment and not end up like so many european countries where you get arrested for mean words

>Suppressed CX4
Yeah, that'd be pretty great for that, honestly. Especially if you mount a flashlight/laser.