A ban on automatic assault rifles

LOLberals are just fucking morons. It is nothing more than that. They are knee jerk reactionary morons. Nothing more.
 
The first pistol grip ban (assault weapon ban) was a joke, and the fact that you don't know that tells me you have no idea what you are talking about.

Banning cosmetic details...that's what the first AWB accomplished.

Are you scared of pistol grips and flash suppressors?

Gain some knowledge.

How stupid can a law be? ^^^This stupid.

I agree with it all.
Why?

What possible difference does it make if you have a rifle with a pistol grip and a flash suppresor, or a rifle that is exactly the same, except it has a thumbhole stock and a threaded barrel tip designed to accept an aftermarket flash suppressor instead?

It's a rhetorical question...the answer is none at all.

That's why it is stupid.

It's not "stupid' at all.

You are misreading the requirements.

It's looking for 2 characteristics.

Personally? I think gun ownership should be limited to bolt action rifles, shotguns and revolvers.
 
So then only buy those Sallow.. It's none of your fucking business which firearms i choose to buy. I think we should limit LOLberals to state and local elections only too.
 
LOLberals are fucking morons. This whole "assault" rifle debate confirms it. They same the same retarded fucking shit over and over again. They have no clue of what they speak, and yet, they will continue to repeat it until Obama passes an "assault" weapons ban. Which will, like the last one, accomplish nothing.

I'll post in big font so maybe it will sink in for some of you dullards.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied the "assault weapon" ban and other gun control attempts, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence."[7] A 2004 critical review of research on firearms by a National Research Council panel also noted that academic studies of the assault weapon ban "did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence" and noted "due to the fact that the relative rarity with which the banned guns were used in crime before the ban ... the maximum potential effect of the ban on gun violence outcomes would be very small. The United States Department of Justice National Institute of Justice found should the ban be renewed, its effects on gun violence would likely be small, and perhaps too small for reliable measurement, because rifles in general, including rifles referred to as "assault rifles" or "assault weapons", are rarely used in gun crimes.

Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gun Violence: How Research on an American Health Crisis Has Been Suppressed
The CDC’s mission is to “create the expertise, information, and tools that people and communities need to protect their health – through health promotion, prevention of disease, injury and disability and preparedness for new health threats.” In other words, keep people safe. But since 1996, the agency has effectively been muzzled from contributing its thinking about the implications of research related to gun violence.
In 1995, about 5 percent of the budget of the CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control was devoted to gun research, according to a 2007 minority report from a Senate subcommittee released under the direction of Senator Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma). Some of its funding went to researchers whose work suggested that gun ownership made gun owners specifically and the public generally less safe and that there was a need to urge greater regulation over guns.
Gun Violence: How Research on an American Health Crisis Has Been Suppressed - Forbes

Done.
 
So then only buy those Sallow.. It's none of your fucking business which firearms i choose to buy. I think we should limit LOLberals to state and local elections only too.

It's my business when crazies wind up killing my fellow Americans because they have access to extremely lethal firepower on account of you folks.

I cannot comprehend why you folks support giving assholes the means to shoot kids in face.
 
The first pistol grip ban (assault weapon ban) was a joke, and the fact that you don't know that tells me you have no idea what you are talking about.

Banning cosmetic details...that's what the first AWB accomplished.

Are you scared of pistol grips and flash suppressors?

Gain some knowledge.

How stupid can a law be? ^^^This stupid.

I agree with it all.

I'd also like to see electronic chips on bullets or serial numbers.

Liability for gun owners and sellers.

Liability for gun manufacturers.

National database to track guns.
Hell, why don't you just demand the immediate execution of anyone who attempts to buy a gun? :cool:

I'm not the one looking to kill anyone. Or support giving nuts the means to kill anyone.
 
I agree with it all.
Why?

What possible difference does it make if you have a rifle with a pistol grip and a flash suppresor, or a rifle that is exactly the same, except it has a thumbhole stock and a threaded barrel tip designed to accept an aftermarket flash suppressor instead?

It's a rhetorical question...the answer is none at all.

That's why it is stupid.

It's not "stupid' at all.

You are misreading the requirements.

It's looking for 2 characteristics.

Personally? I think gun ownership should be limited to bolt action rifles, shotguns and revolvers.

No, I'm not.

Here it is again:

Criteria of an assault weapon

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:


Here is my AR15:

AR15_zpse369ae04.jpg
Detachable magazine...check.

Pistol grip...check.

Bayonet mount...negative.

Folding or telescoping stock...negative.

Flash suppressor...negative.

Grenade launching capability...negative.​
So, my AR15 has a detachable magazine and 1 secondary characteristic...a pistol grip.

It needs to have TWO secondary characteristics to be categorized as an assault weapon.

My AR15 was totally legal during the ban.

So what did the ban accomplish? Nothing.

Who cares if a rifle has a pistol grip, or a grenade launching attachment, or a bayonet mount or a folding/telescoping stock?

The whole assault weapons ban was nothing more than a "these guns look scary" ban. A weapon that functioned exactly the same way, but didn't look scary and make liberals and gun grabbers crap their collective pants when they saw them WERE TOTALLY LEGAL DURING THE BAN.

That is the definition of stupidity.
 
Last edited:
So then only buy those Sallow.. It's none of your fucking business which firearms i choose to buy. I think we should limit LOLberals to state and local elections only too.

It's my business when crazies wind up killing my fellow Americans because they have access to extremely lethal firepower on account of you folks.

I cannot comprehend why you folks support giving assholes the means to shoot kids in face.

No, it is not your business. And blaming law abiding citizens for a crazy persons actions is typical of LOLberal morons such as yourself. You're a reactionary retard. Your gun ban will not curb gun violence. It hasn't worked in the past, and it wont work now. You just HOPE it will CHANGE this time. it's an insanity thing. Try the same thing over and over, expect different results.
 
I'd also like to see electronic chips on bullets or serial numbers.

Yea, cuz there's NO WAY bad guys could make bullets without your government chips and markings. No way! :doubt:

The same way the guns are made by gunsmiths. These tools are made by people. Make a law and people will make them against the rules, or acquire them through channels aside from civilian markets.

but you can not tell an insane moron any of this. They want something done. Regardless of the ill consequences or the fact that it curtails nothing it was suppose to do.
 
Personally? I think gun ownership should be limited to bolt action rifles, shotguns and revolvers.

You realize there is nothing to stop a shotgun from accepting a magazine with as many rounds in it as you like, right?

Do you also realize that revolvers fire one round per trigger pull, just like a semi auto pistol, right? Further, there is nothing stopping revolvers from having just as many rounds in them as a semi auto pistol. Do you understand this?

Here's a revolver capable of holding 20 rounds...and it was made in the 1820s...

th


Point is, there is NOTHING you can ban that won't end up in the hands of criminals if that's what they want. You're only putting good people at a disadvantage in attempting to do so.
 
LOLberals dont care. The point isn't to stop gun violence. The point is to see another useless law. Because it makes them FEEL better. It always comes back to going on a feeling. No logic or rational thought needed. Just say "we need it."
 
Hell, the right already have enough ASRs to fight a war. Keep them from getting the ammunition by banning manufacturing and sells. And set back and watch them explode.

I have to ask, is English your first language?
 
They will re instate that ban on semi automatic assault rifles. What will you righty's do then?

I see this as a good thing. (I am a gun owner) and I see it as a fuck you to Bush as well. I wonder how well he sleeps at night. Probably like a baby since he is so fucking lost.

why does your thread title say" A ban on automatic assault rifles" and here you are referring to semi autos..:eusa_eh:

oh right, you're a knee jerking buffoon, got it..:rolleyes:
 

Forum List

Back
Top