CDZ If weapons of war need to be banned, should this weapon be banned as well?

[2aguy]

The anti gun movement has started using the term Weapon of War, in order to frighten uninformed people into banning guns the anti gunners don't like. The AR-15 is not a weapon of war, it has never been used by the military and yet they keep calling it a weapon of war. The anti gunners say no one needs a semi auto rifle, and that we should be happy with guns that aren't semi autos....this is, of course, an unConstitutional position to take, but they don't care about that.

Now....here is an actual weapon of war, should it be banned? It is the pump action shotgun, used by 13 countries as military weapon....

 

[Crepitus]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

 

[2aguy]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

Why on earth are they against the convention?

 

[Jessica123]

No,

Guns defend freedom.

 

[2aguy]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

You will need to provide a link, I am pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[2aguy]

If anti gunners get semi automatic weapons, this female 3 gun competitor will not be happy....

 

[hjmick]

I've got a 500, and after checking out the 590 Mag fed, I may give up my plans for an AR and get one of those. Less expensive, more reliable, what's not to like?

Thanks for the heads up there 2a...

 

[Crepitus]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

Why on earth are they against the convention?

Have you ever seen the wound a close range load of buckshot leaves?

 

[Wyatt earp]

The anti gun movement has started using the term Weapon of War, in order to frighten uninformed people into banning guns the anti gunners don't like. The AR-15 is not a weapon of war, it has never been used by the military and yet they keep calling it a weapon of war. The anti gunners say no one needs a semi auto rifle, and that we should be happy with guns that aren't semi autos....this is, of course, an unConstitutional position to take, but they don't care about that.

Now....here is an actual weapon of war, should it be banned? It is the pump action shotgun, used by 13 countries as military weapon....

I saw this , thought you might like it

 

[Crepitus]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

You will need to provide a link, I am pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about.

Pretty sure I do but can't find a link. the reasons are the same for not using expanding/fragmenting rounds.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

Why on earth are they against the convention?

Have you ever seen the wound a close range load of buckshot leaves?

If I ever have to fire one in defense, that will be the thing I will be least concerned with.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Methinks we will leave this to SCOTUS, not to 2aguy.

 

[2aguy]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

You will need to provide a link, I am pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about.

Pretty sure I do but can't find a link. the reasons are the same for not using expanding/fragmenting rounds.

Yeah, I looked too and couldn't find a ban in the conventions...and considering how fast we bend to the Convention I don't think you are correct.....

 

[2aguy]

Methinks we will leave this to SCOTUS, not to 2aguy.

The SCOTUS already ruled on this...several times...

D.C. v Heller
Caetano v Massachusetts
Scalia's dissent in Friedman v Highland Park
Miller v United States
Cruickshank v United States

 

[JakeStarkey]

2aguy won't tell the reader that SCOTUS per Heller reserved the right to further rule on matters 2dA.

SCOTUS believes and practices the Living Constitution theory.

 

[hjmick]

At the Hague-Convention, Germany expressed great concern and opposition regarding the use of shotguns by enemy troops. Their request to exclude shotguns and scatter-shot from the battlefield was struck down. After this ruling, German commanders announced their policy to summarily execute any soldiers captured with shotguns.

The clause in question was "weapons causing superfluous injury whether to a single target, or to multiple targets, as prohibited by the law of war." This argument is closest, but was found not equivalent, to the Hague Declaration in 1899 Concerning Expanding Bullets.

The Geneva Convention does not and has never dealt with specific weapon usage; its focus was (and remains) prisoner treatment, wounded-enemy treatment, and civilian-on-battlefield treatment and Geneva does address chemical weapons in.

 

[Pogo]

Without even reading past the titlle -- the term "weapon of war" is redundant. War is what weapons are made for, at least firearms. It's their whole raison d'être.

 

[Crepitus]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

You will need to provide a link, I am pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about.

Pretty sure I do but can't find a link. the reasons are the same for not using expanding/fragmenting rounds.

Yeah, I looked too and couldn't find a ban in the conventions...and considering how fast we bend to the Convention I don't think you are correct.....

I couldn't find one way or the other, nor in the Hague conventions either. If I'm wrong I'm wrong. Doesn't happen often but it does happen.

 

[2aguy]

2aguy won't tell the reader that SCOTUS per Heller reserved the right to further rule on matters 2dA.

SCOTUS believes and practices the Living Constitution theory.

Caetano v Massachusetts and Friedman v Highland Park took care of that ...

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

2aguy won't tell the reader that SCOTUS per Heller reserved the right to further rule on matters 2dA.

Of course they did. And should Trump get another pick or two, they will likely further rule in opposition to your skewed thinking.