Yes, we all know the difference between semi-auto and select-fire. The bulk of the public does not, and does not care. They just want those ugly-looking military-style firearms out of the street and the schoolyard. It's an easy sell to the public to ban them. But, what do we do? Tell them they're idiots and don't know what they're talking about? That seems to be the general run of things here and elsewhere.
Holy cow, I almost found myself agreeing with you there. But wait...
I wouldn't trade either for an AR-15 or anything similar. Not ever.
And then you go and display your true agenda.
Like the man said, the 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting, nor is it about what YOU think is appropriate weaponry.
While I agree that it's tough to argue in favor of ugly black guns, the REAL point is, we should'nt even have to...
"Holy cow, I almost found myself agreeing with you there. But wait...
I wouldn't trade either for an AR-15 or anything similar. Not ever.
And then you go and display your true agenda.
Nope. What I said is that I would not trade my scoped .30-06 and Mossberg for an AR-15. Not in a million years. The two firearms I have are useful today and would be useful in the unlikely event that I had to repel some sort of invader on a broader basis than just my home.
Demonstrate to me how an AR-15 would be more useful to me than the two weapons I mentioned. I do not think you can do that.
In the unlikely event of a revolution or an invasion of foreign troops, I will be far more effective with either of those two weapons than I would be with an AR-15 or its equivalent.
No agenda. Just practical thinking.