Why do their gun control ideas never seem to apply to the police?

The 1930s proves you wrong. No one is safer if law enforcement is outgunned. Thank goodness the NFA was passed to rectify the situation.

 

Maybe we shouldn't have traffic laws either since the people who support such laws are willing to make exceptions when cops speed and run red lights with their sirens on.

 

Clyde Barrow stole his BARs from National Guard armories. John Dillinger stole his Thompsons from police stations. Under NFA 1934, the National Guard and the police were still allowed to possess fully automatic firearms, so how did it affect criminals?

What do you think actually drove the passing of NFA 1934? All those mass shootings by Barrow, Dillinger and Machine Gun Kelly?

 

I will just always point out how stupid it is to protest police violence and then allow them to keep weapons the left generally describe as mass murder weapons. That is like protesting the school bully, then making sure only the bully has access to the school baseball bats, while those he bullies only get the wiffle bats; ensuring fighting back against said abuse is futile.

Pass whatever you want. I’m keeping my evil black rifles regardless without registrating them. I don’t trust any politician that only wants the government to have all the guns. It is a hell of a lot harder to force people onto the trains when they have their own AR-15s to shoot back with.

 

The left doesn't. Google the expression "mass murder weapons" and see how many hits you can get where the left does that, unless they are just pointing out that they can be used for mass murder, which is obviously true.

More importantly though, you just make up Straw Man positions and pretend that leftists hold them.

You are assuming that if there is police corruption at all, then every officer is pure evil. Good cops get guns too. We rely on those good cops to protect us from criminals like corrupt cops.

This has already been pointed out to you.

 

We've had mass murders committed with "assault weapons", semiautomatic rifles not classified as "assault weapons", bolt action rifles, lever action rifles, semiautomatic shotguns, pump action shotguns, double barrel shotguns, pistols, revolvers, and rimfire firearms. What gun control advocates do commonly and erroneously claim is that firearms like the AR-15 are only useful for mass shootings, are "weapons of war", and are the most commonly used firearm in mass shootings.

 

No they don't. Find me some examples.

They are used in war.

Who claims that? I can't know for sure that nobody claims that, because every falsehood is claimed by someone, but it's certainly not a common error and anyone who follows gun control advocates should know that.

 

What military issues/fields the AR15?
In what war(s) did those militaries use the AR15?

 

"“These weapons were designed for one purpose and one purpose only: to kill the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time,” Trudeau said at a daily media briefing in Ottawa."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-in-aftermath-of-mass-shooting-idUSKBN22D62V

""When you have got military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, they're intended for one purpose. And that is to inflict as much damage on human beings in as short as time as possible.- Mark Shields"

"I happen to believe that certain types of assault weapons, which are manufactured and designed for military purposes to kill people very quickly should not be used in civilian society" Bernie Sanders

"The only people who use them [so-called assault weapons] are mass murderers." Charles Schumer

The semiautomatic AR-15 is not used in war. The pump action shotgun, bolt action rifle and the revolver have been and are used in war.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ar-15-used-mass-shootings-weapon-of-choice-60-minutes-2019-06-23/
https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...became-mass-shooters-weapon-of-choice-107819/

 

The bans on magazines and certain guns is not from the belief that it makes us safer; it is because they know they can't destroy the second amendment all at once. They are using the method used by termites destroying things one tiny nibble at a time.

If anyone would like a look into the future, Los Angeles (The bluest part of the bluest state) does not issue CCWs to ordinary people. Only cops, judges, and criminals carry guns here.

 

How do you avoid dangerous situations?

 

easy, I don't go to areas that look dangerous, easy to avoid danger, also easy to create dangerous situations walking around armed with a gun

 

I know four families that didn't look for dangerous situations and suffered a home invasion. Three of the four lived in Upper Middle class neighborhoods and one lived in a lower middle class neighborhood. So sometimes when you don't look for trouble, trouble comes to you. In one of the instances, the target was a school teacher and one of the perps had been one of her students. I guess by your liberal logic the teacher was creating a dangerous situation by teaching school.

 

Let us just cut to the chase:

If your position is only the cops should have AR-15s and other semi-automatic weapons, then you will have to use deadly force to take ours. We are not going to allow the state to have a monopoly on the best guns for defense and a shootout.

Of course that would make you a hypocrite to send the cops you protest for shooting people, armed with the same guns you say are just good for killing people to use police brutality and gun violence to take guns people legally purchased and refuse to sell or hand over as they are their property. There are not enough cops in the country to take on millions of AR-15 owners. Individuals fall, groups are way more powerful.

So either accept we were keeping the guns we already purchased to keep things even Steven or you can try and start a shooting war to take them. It will have to be one or the other, because we aren’t giving up our expensive personal property.