CDZ I do not understand the fascination with and demand for semi-automatic rifles

[M14 Shooter]

The AR 15 was designed to kill an human attacker, not deer or anything else.

False.
The AR15 was developed by Colt from the M16 to be a "sporting rifle".
There are a great number of shooting sports involving rifles, none of which involve killing a human attacker.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If you put assault style weapons under the NFA, you're not banning them because people, who are willing to do the paperwork, can purchase and own such weapons as long as they comply with NFA rules.

You are, however, creating an unnecessary and ineffective restriction on the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms by the law abiding.
By definition, unnecessary and ineffective restrictions on the exercise of a right infringe upon that right.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Just write a law placing "assault style weapons" under the NFA.

You cannot demonstrate the necessity for, or the efficacy of, doing so.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yes, and also the value of wounding an enemy in battle that can be said to cause the enemy more hardship than the dead. The Nato cartridge was designed with that in mind.

The "NATO cartridge" is a development of a civilian cartridge, with no practical change in the exterior or terminal ballistics of same.
.

 

[Donald H]

A law saying what you suggest wouldn't last til the water got hot, because semi-automatic rifles aren't "military weapons, modified for civilian use".

The M-14 is based on the M-1 Garland. You want to outlaw Garlands, too? What's the next round of stupidity? Will bolt action rifles be called " high powered sniper rifles"?...lol

Garland twice!

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Garland twice!

Uh, what?...lol

 

[Donald H]

The "NATO cartridge" is a development of a civilian cartridge, with no practical change in the exterior or terminal ballistics of same.
.

No, not true and if you know your topic you can tell me why. I'll give you as much time as you need.

 

[Donald H]

Uh, what?...lol

Heh, that's what I expected Bill!

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

No, not true and if you know your topic you can tell me why. I'll give you as much time as you need.

The 223 Remington's parent case is the 222 Remington. He isn't wrong.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Heh, that's what I expected Bill!

So much for clean debate...lol. You just can't help yourselves. Can you?

 

[toobfreak]

If you thought the founders intention regarding the second amendment related to sport, or hunting... You were wrong.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

By placing those firearms under the NFA, you will be placing a tax on them. The Supreme Court has ruled that a right can't be taxed.

I don't think so, because there are hundreds of weapons that fall under the NFA right now that you can't own without doing NFA paperwork.

There are even some weapons that are banned outright under the NRA, the M4 Carbine the army and marines use, for example.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

I don't think so, because there are hundreds of weapons that fall under the NFA right now that you can't own without doing NFA paperwork.

There are even some weapons that are banned outright under the NRA, the M4 Carbine the army and marines use, for example.

The only firearms that fall under the NFA, are short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, suppressors and automatic firearms.

M-4's aren't banned. There may not be available, but they aren't banned. An M-4 is literally a carbine version of the M-16. Are they banned under the unconstitutional amendment that bans automatic weapons built after 1986? I guess, technically. Can I apply for and receive an FFL and build one? Yes, I can. So, "banned" is a relative term.

But, again, it's unconstitutional to tax a right.

 

[Donald H]

The 223 Remington's parent case is the 222 Remington. He isn't wrong.

Bill, the debate left you behind with your Garland rifle.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Bill, the debate left you behind with your Garland rifle.

Insults are all you or people have...lol

 

[M14 Shooter]

No, not true and if you know your topic you can tell me why. I'll give you as much time as you need.

Is your statement, above, one of ignorance, or dishonesty?

The .223 Remington (designated as the 223 Remington by the SAAMI[3] and 223 Rem by the CIP[4]) is a rimless, bottlenecked rifle cartridge. It was developed in 1957 by Remington Arms and Fairchild Industries for the U.S. Continental Army Command of the United States Army as part of a project to create a small-caliber, high-velocity firearm. The .223 Remington is considered one of the most popular cartridges and is currently used by a wide range of semi-automatic and manual-action rifles as well as handguns.

In the US Army, the cartridge is referred to as "Cartridge, 5.56 mm ball M193." The 5.56×45mm NATO was also developed from the 223 Remington.[5]...on.[5] In September 1963, the .223 Remington cartridge was officially accepted and named "Cartridge, 5.56 mm ball, M193"

.223 Remington - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What the remarks above allude to is that the fascination with and demand for with semi-automatic rifles derives from what one call a hobbyist collector's passion. That fine, but it's also emotional. [1] That said, I don't seek a justification; I seek an explanation(s), one that is credible.

Asked and answered.

That you don’t like the explanation doesn’t make it invalid.

For example, I’ve got a Vepr Kalashnikov platform semi-auto rifle chambered in 54R that’s literally a blast to shoot.

It also makes for an excellent hunting rifle, suitable for most – if not all – North American game.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Just write a law placing "assault style weapons" under the NFA.

Define "assault style weapons" as a style of weapon used by a military at some point, modified for civilian use, that can attach a magazine of greater than 5 rounds, etc.

That would cover the Mini-14 which is based on the M14.

You could still own these weapons, you'd just have to comply with the NFA.

Obviously, a law can be written to cover the Mini-14.

At the risk of being pedantic, you would amend the NFA – it already exists as a law.

And the 1911 and Beretta 92 were used by the military at some point and have magazines greater than 5 rounds, certainly such handguns shouldn’t be subject to NFA restrictions.

 

[Batcat]

The Second Amendment is not jut about hunting and target shooting.

 

[blackhawk]

It's simply a matter of personal preference some prefer semi automatic rifles others bolt action rifles some a semi automatic pistol others six shot revolver some shotguns.