Joking aside, they're great for coyotes, raccoons, spooking off the occasional cougar... great home-defense weapon as well.
Seriously, if it weren't for the fact that .223 Rem (or 5.56) wasn't so fucking expensive due to lefties panic-buying all the ammo, it'd be the perfect all-rounder for homesteading folks - works great for me.
Along with "the people", the Second Amendment specifically mentions the militia, consisting of armed citizens not enlisted in any regular military corps — the "citizen army". The militia's purpose is, as its name implies, a military one. The militia was — and still may be — pitted against other military forces. That was true in pre-U.S. North America, it was true during the Revolutionary War, and it is true today.
If the militia may be pitted against regular soldiers, whether of a foreign invader or of a tyrannical domestic government, then it follows automatically that at a minimum the citizens comprising the militia must possess personal arms (as opposed to large or crew-served arms like cannon) equal to those of the opposing soldiers. Equal personal arms means, of course, those that include all design features, capabilities, and ergonomics that make a military firearm suitable for modern battle. If this is not the case then there is no point in having a militia, as it will not pose an effective fighting force. For example, the extreme inadequacy of bolt action rifles in combat against semiautomatic arms is well known. But the Founders' firm insistence upon having an effective militia is absolutely clear from their numerous writings on the subject and from the existence of the Second Amendment itself.
That being so, military-pattern firearms are obviously protected by the Second Amendment. Therefore any restrictive legislation on military-pattern firearms, or on military design elements of other firearms, is completely contrary to the word and spirit of the Second Amendment and is therefore flatly unconstitutional. [U.S. v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)completely supports this.]
Question looks like it’s going to get answered. Probably time for everyone to start assembling with fellow patriots. Not sure if NRA, GOA or any existing one is any good. They where useless for open carry and will be useless if this shit turns sour. NRA is member driven so maybe it’s time for everyone to go to a meeting.
I guess they never heard of pig hunts in the south where feral pigs are destroying native flora and fauna. AR works very well in this case.
They live in urban centers where the most destructive animals are BLM.
That sounds like they have an even better reason for an AR-15.
Yup, and with some if you don't take out enough of the herd quickly enough they'll charge you. And eat you.
Joking aside, they're great for coyotes, raccoons, spooking off the occasional cougar... great home-defense weapon as well.
Seriously, if it weren't for the fact that .223 Rem (or 5.56) wasn't so fucking expensive due to lefties panic-buying all the ammo, it'd be the perfect all-rounder for homesteading folks - works great for me.
Along with "the people", the Second Amendment specifically mentions the militia, consisting of armed citizens not enlisted in any regular military corps — the "citizen army". The militia's purpose is, as its name implies, a military one. The militia was — and still may be — pitted against other military forces. That was true in pre-U.S. North America, it was true during the Revolutionary War, and it is true today.
If the militia may be pitted against regular soldiers, whether of a foreign invader or of a tyrannical domestic government, then it follows automatically that at a minimum the citizens comprising the militia must possess personal arms (as opposed to large or crew-served arms like cannon) equal to those of the opposing soldiers. Equal personal arms means, of course, those that include all design features, capabilities, and ergonomics that make a military firearm suitable for modern battle. If this is not the case then there is no point in having a militia, as it will not pose an effective fighting force. For example, the extreme inadequacy of bolt action rifles in combat against semiautomatic arms is well known. But the Founders' firm insistence upon having an effective militia is absolutely clear from their numerous writings on the subject and from the existence of the Second Amendment itself.
That being so, military-pattern firearms are obviously protected by the Second Amendment. Therefore any restrictive legislation on military-pattern firearms, or on military design elements of other firearms, is completely contrary to the word and spirit of the Second Amendment and is therefore flatly unconstitutional. [U.S. v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)completely supports this.]
Predators.
Prairie Dogs, Coyotes and I have killed seven White Tail deer through the years with an AR, with one shot, (shot placement).
Just to be sure, were prairie dogs and coyotes helping you kill the deer?
You can turn an AR into whatever type of gun you want
“Why do you need an AR?”
Because I don’t have 10 guns
“Why do you need 10 guns?”
Because I don’t have an AR
Question looks like it’s going to get answered. Probably time for everyone to start assembling with fellow patriots. Not sure if NRA, GOA or any existing one is any good. They where useless for open carry and will be useless if this shit turns sour. NRA is member driven so maybe it’s time for everyone to go to a meeting.
Why do they think the 2nd amendment is for hunting is always my first question to these retards.
Its literally to fucking go to war against domestic and foreign enemies of the Constitution. Which is exactly why they want to get rid of it
Why wouldn't you hunt with an AR-15?
Democrats
Swine
Shhh, I'm hunting commies, hahahaha.
/Elmer Fudd
Riot control.
Also hogs.. oh wait
Yes sir!
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!
Call me doomer but no one will be hunting any tyrants if the mandatory assault rifle registry or tax ever becomes a thing.