TexasCHLforum.com

Back on track. Did anyone see the one where the reporter actually went through the whole process to buy a gun, but, his background check got denied. Talk about a backfire. In actually surprised that one got out to the public since it doesn't fit with their agenda.

What the other side seems to be arguing in these types of articles, is that it's "too easy and quick" to be able to purchase a "deadly weapon". As if imposing some arbitrary time limit on making a legal purchase is going to force criminals to abandon their malicious plans.

The Wall wrote:The Orlando shooter didn't use an AR15.

Right. Like I said, there are lots of inaccuracies in this article. As well as many others that I've been seeing lately that are similar in subject.

On my social media feed, I've seen a few people sharing "articles" about how the authors are too quickly and easily, (in their opinion,) able to purchase an AR-15. The same gun that is, (in their opinion,) infamously used by so many killers, (they really want to hammer that point home if you haven't gathered already.) One example is the article, linked below, where the author claims that he, a 20 year old college student, (of legal age, but, apparently he thinks that's too young, I guess,) could have bought a gun "with less paperwork than when he applied for a job" [paraphrased]. Mind you, he didn't actually buy the gun, so he didn't go through the whole process, but, he 'could have'.
There's definitely wrong info in this article and others like it.

Edited to clarify that It is the opinion of the articles author that the AR-15 is used by killers, and wrongly includes the Orlando guy. I am trying to say that this author and others like him keep trying to vilify the AR-15. I, in no way, meant to imply that I was trying to paint the AR-15 in bad light.

https://thetab.com/us/2016/06/14/i-was- ... utes-19833