NRA Fanatics are WRONG - Vast Majority of Americans Favor Tougher Gun Control Laws

[OnTheRight]

Had you followed these threads you would have noticed an assault weapon is fully automatic and coverd under the 86 law.

Seems you jumped the gun.......................

Then you'll have no problem citing the previous federal ban and current bans in some states that define an assault weapon under the law as fully automatic. I'll wait.

An assault weapon would be any weapon that has a selector switch that would go from safe to fire to automatic. It's not my fault democrats are too stupid to know and understand what is an assault weapon and what isn't.

This thread is discussing gun bans. I'm talking about what was and in some cases still is banned under the law and how the law defines an assault weapon. I could turn 10/22 into an assault weapon in about 5 minutes.....

 

[OnTheRight]

1986 is the machine gun ban date. 1994 was the assault weapon ban date. Your lack of knowledge becomes more obvious with each post.

Had you followed these threads you would have noticed an assault weapon is fully automatic and coverd under the 86 law.

Seems you jumped the gun.......................

I don't think he's an anti gunner, I just think he's a bit confused.

Guns put food on my table. Basically guns are my life.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Then you'll have no problem citing the previous federal ban and current bans in some states that define an assault weapon under the law as fully automatic. I'll wait.

An assault weapon would be any weapon that has a selector switch that would go from safe to fire to automatic. It's not my fault democrats are too stupid to know and understand what is an assault weapon and what isn't.

This thread is discussing gun bans. I'm talking about what was and in some cases still is banned under the law and how the law defines an assault weapon. I could turn 10/22 into an assault weapon in about 5 minutes.....

I wouldn't know anything about that nor would I talk about it on an open forum

 

[OnTheRight]

An assault weapon would be any weapon that has a selector switch that would go from safe to fire to automatic. It's not my fault democrats are too stupid to know and understand what is an assault weapon and what isn't.

This thread is discussing gun bans. I'm talking about what was and in some cases still is banned under the law and how the law defines an assault weapon. I could turn 10/22 into an assault weapon in about 5 minutes.....

I wouldn't know anything about that nor would I talk about it on an open forum

You wouldn't discuss the fact that you could buy an adjustable stock with a pistol grip on hundreds of different websites and turn a 10/22 rifle into an assault weapon? Why not?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This thread is discussing gun bans. I'm talking about what was and in some cases still is banned under the law and how the law defines an assault weapon. I could turn 10/22 into an assault weapon in about 5 minutes.....

I wouldn't know anything about that nor would I talk about it on an open forum

You wouldn't discuss the fact that you could buy an adjustable stock with a pistol grip on hundreds of different websites and turn a 10/22 rifle into an assault weapon? Why not?

I don't know how many times I have too tell you this, but just because something looks like an assault weapon does not make it one.

It actually has to function like one.

 

[westwall]

This thread is discussing gun bans. I'm talking about what was and in some cases still is banned under the law and how the law defines an assault weapon. I could turn 10/22 into an assault weapon in about 5 minutes.....

I wouldn't know anything about that nor would I talk about it on an open forum

You wouldn't discuss the fact that you could buy an adjustable stock with a pistol grip on hundreds of different websites and turn a 10/22 rifle into an assault weapon? Why not?

You're trying to be cute. We too know a lot about firearms, more than you in some cases I would hazard, we just choose to ignore the legal fiction of "assault weapon" as a legal definition and use the proper one for an assault weapon. Just like I don't use the term semi-automatic to describe a self loading weapon (as the British classify them).

We choose to use the accurate definitions so stop trying to be cute.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I wouldn't know anything about that nor would I talk about it on an open forum

You wouldn't discuss the fact that you could buy an adjustable stock with a pistol grip on hundreds of different websites and turn a 10/22 rifle into an assault weapon? Why not?

You're trying to be cute. We too know a lot about firearms, more than you in some cases I would hazard, we just choose to ignore the legal fiction of "assault weapon" as a legal definition and use the proper one for an assault weapon. Just like I don't use the term semi-automatic to describe a self loading weapon (as the British classify them).

We choose to use the accurate definitions so stop trying to be cute.

That's when the confusion starts when you stop using the correct terminology.

 

[Full-Auto]

You wouldn't discuss the fact that you could buy an adjustable stock with a pistol grip on hundreds of different websites and turn a 10/22 rifle into an assault weapon? Why not?

You're trying to be cute. We too know a lot about firearms, more than you in some cases I would hazard, we just choose to ignore the legal fiction of "assault weapon" as a legal definition and use the proper one for an assault weapon. Just like I don't use the term semi-automatic to describe a self loading weapon (as the British classify them).

We choose to use the accurate definitions so stop trying to be cute.

That's when the confusion starts when you stop using the correct terminology.

Reb you and I both know the definition of an assault rifle...

However that has changed, AR receivers have been stamped CAR for civilian assault rifle.

I dont give a rats ass what they call them. I will never turn them in.

Then just to bust a few chops I just bought a S@w MP 40. It was a hell of a deal. Holster, magazine holster, 3 mags, a loader and two trigger locks.

I might go back and get another one if I like the way it shoots.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You're trying to be cute. We too know a lot about firearms, more than you in some cases I would hazard, we just choose to ignore the legal fiction of "assault weapon" as a legal definition and use the proper one for an assault weapon. Just like I don't use the term semi-automatic to describe a self loading weapon (as the British classify them).

We choose to use the accurate definitions so stop trying to be cute.

That's when the confusion starts when you stop using the correct terminology.

Reb you and I both know the definition of an assault rifle...

However that has changed, AR receivers have been stamped CAR for civilian assault rifle.

I dont give a rats ass what they call them. I will never turn them in.

Then just to bust a few chops I just bought a S@w MP 40. It was a hell of a deal. Holster, magazine holster, 3 mags, a loader and two trigger locks.

I might go back and get another one if I like the way it shoots.

Question for you, if those CAR's are so good and effective assault weapons why don't the military use them?

 

[Darkwind]

Contrary to what the deranged NRA fanatics on this messageboard have to say, the VAST MAJORITY of Americans favor tougher gun control laws --

A 2011 New York Times/CBS News poll found that 63 percent of Americans favor a ban on high-capacity magazines; just as many supported an assault-weapons ban.

According to the poll, even a majority of gun-owning households favor a ban on assault weapons, although by a smaller margin. 54% of them favor it, and 44% oppose --

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Jan11_Econ.pdf

Also in 2011, a Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 83 percent supported financing a system in which people treated for mental illness would be reported to a federal gun registry database to prevent them from buying guns; 71 percent favored this for those treated for drug abuse.

http://www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1120a1 Guns and Discourse.pdf

So let me simplify this poll data for you uninformed, unsophisticated NRA simpletons -- most Americans are on MY SIDE, not yours.

All of your right-wing nutjob spinning and excuse-making isn't going to change that fact.

Wow, really? Are we running short on lithium as well as helium?

 

[Abatis]

So let me simplify this poll data for you uninformed, unsophisticated NRA simpletons -- most Americans are on MY SIDE, not yours.

All of your right-wing nutjob spinning and excuse-making isn't going to change that fact.

And thankfully the United States of America is a Constitutional Republic not a democracy so the fundamental, individual rights of a citizen are not subject to the ignorant whims of collectivists and those they have brainwashed, even if they constitute a majority.

 

[Abatis]

That's right -- none of you Repug lightweights can do anything but throw around weak-ass insults because you've got no facts, no intellect, and no game.

I'm RIGHT, you're WRONG. So you tea bagger retards just keep giving each other comforting hand jobs.

Let's for the sake of argument, say you are right.

Does that change the second amendment?

Nope.

I guess we get to keep our right to defend ourselves with guns.

The second amendment says you have the right to bear arms...it doesn't say anything about what kind/type of arms. Which is a major reason why 70% of Americans agree with me and not right-wing extremist nut jobs such as you.

No wonder you never try to have real debates...because you are a fucking unsophisticated intellectual lightweight and you suck at it.

More dishonest bullshit from a dishonest tea bagger pussy.

If there is one type of firearm that enjoys near absolute 2nd Amendment protection it is what are commonly labeled "assault weapons" (medium caliber, semi-automatic, detachable mag civilian models of military arms, i.e., AR's and AK's and their variants) . . .

How would a ban on "assault weapons" pass constitutional muster when the primary criteria for determining if an arm has 2nd Amendment protection is it being of the type in common civilian use and/or currently employed in civilized warfare and that constitute the ordinary military equipment and able to be used advantageously in the common defense?

The strongest evidence of a weak mind is vulgarity and personal insult as a proxy for debate.

 

[Abatis]

There should still be no need to carry a gun. A heavier police pressence is needed.

It is a well established legal doctrine in the USA that government agents owe no duty to individual citizens to protect them from danger or to immediately act to protect an individual even from imminent danger. In the end, the individual should take the measures they think are necessary for their security because only "you" are responsible for your well being.

To me, it is illegitimate to advocate compelling government to disarm law-abiding citizens when a), the citizens can not rely on the police for their safety and b), the police and government are so ineffectual in catching and keeping criminals from preying on citizens (which is a responsibility of government).

 

[Abatis]

Without auto at the selector switch you do not have an assault weapon.

And again you are wrong on the law . . .

The legal definition of "assault weapon" has never included selective fire / full auto / burst fire. Those weapons are "machine guns" or "Assault Rifles".

The anti-gun activists counted on the public's ignorance of semi-auto vs full auto to garner support for an "Assault Weapons Ban".

"Assault weapons, just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms are a new topic. Assault weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons --anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun-- can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons."

Josh Sugarmann, 1988, founder, Violence Policy Center​

Words have meanings and it is best if you don't add to the confusion.

So . . .

"Assault Rifle" is the name of a type of arm that does exist and the characteristics that make the gun an "Assault Rifle" are not met by AR / AK and their civilian clones.

OTOH, "Assault Weapon" is an invented term that was intended to cultivate a response in the general population unfamiliar with the mechanical operation of firearms, specifically the difference between a semi-automatic AR-15 and a fully automatic Assault Rifle like the M-16.

Presently, under federal law the arm known as an "Assault Weapon" does not exist.

Under the 1994 law the criteria was if a semi-automatic rifle was able to accept detachable magazines and had two or more of the following components:

A) Folding or telescoping stock
B) Pistol grip
C) Bayonet mount
D) Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
E) Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those which are mounted externally)​

Under the 1994 law this gun was an "Assault Weapon" because it had a detachable mag, pistol grip, bayonet lug and flash suppressor.

This gun is a "post ban" AR clone with detachable mag and pistol grip and was offered for sale legally under federal law for the 10 years the law was in effect.

The criteria that made a gun an "Assault Weapon" never had anything to do with rate of fire or any other aspect of the the basic mechanical operation of the firearm.

 

[Abatis]

presumably others have observed, that the proximate cause, of the Batman shootings, was the shooter propping open an emergency exit, for perhaps 10 minutes, whilst he retrieved his guns, and donned his armor. Failure to control entrances & exits allowed him to saunter back in, at his leisure, and begin shooting. . . .

Absolutely correct and unless someone wants to argue that the theater shooter needed a bayonet lug, flash suppressor or grenade launcher to commit his crime he would have been able to purchase the weapon he used even if the 1994 law was in effect now . . . And that goes for the drum mag too.

 

[OnTheRight]

I wouldn't know anything about that nor would I talk about it on an open forum

You wouldn't discuss the fact that you could buy an adjustable stock with a pistol grip on hundreds of different websites and turn a 10/22 rifle into an assault weapon? Why not?

I don't know how many times I have too tell you this, but just because something looks like an assault weapon does not make it one.

It actually has to function like one.

Hello......McFly?????


I also don't know how many times I have to tell you this:

The discussion in this thread is centered around a potential assault weapons ban. An assault weapon is defined under the law in the previous Federal ban as well as in some existing state bans. In regard to an assault weapons ban it really doesn't matter what you think is or isn't an assault weapon. What matters is how an assault weapon is defined under the law. There is nothing at all about selective fire or full auto function in the definition of an assault weapon under the law.

 

[saveliberty]

I favor tougher nutcase laws.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Without auto at the selector switch you do not have an assault weapon.

And again you are wrong on the law . . .

The legal definition of "assault weapon" has never included selective fire / full auto / burst fire. Those weapons are "machine guns" or "Assault Rifles".

The anti-gun activists counted on the public's ignorance of semi-auto vs full auto to garner support for an "Assault Weapons Ban".

"Assault weapons, just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms are a new topic. Assault weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons --anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun-- can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons."

Josh Sugarmann, 1988, founder, Violence Policy Center​

Words have meanings and it is best if you don't add to the confusion.

So . . .

"Assault Rifle" is the name of a type of arm that does exist and the characteristics that make the gun an "Assault Rifle" are not met by AR / AK and their civilian clones.

OTOH, "Assault Weapon" is an invented term that was intended to cultivate a response in the general population unfamiliar with the mechanical operation of firearms, specifically the difference between a semi-automatic AR-15 and a fully automatic Assault Rifle like the M-16.

Presently, under federal law the arm known as an "Assault Weapon" does not exist.

Under the 1994 law the criteria was if a semi-automatic rifle was able to accept detachable magazines and had two or more of the following components:

A) Folding or telescoping stock
B) Pistol grip
C) Bayonet mount
D) Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
E) Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those which are mounted externally)​

Under the 1994 law this gun was an "Assault Weapon" because it had a detachable mag, pistol grip, bayonet lug and flash suppressor.

This gun is a "post ban" AR clone with detachable mag and pistol grip and was offered for sale legally under federal law for the 10 years the law was in effect.

The criteria that made a gun an "Assault Weapon" never had anything to do with rate of fire or any other aspect of the the basic mechanical operation of the firearm.

Just because it's a law doesn't make it right.
This is what an assault weapon use to be
assault rifle 
noun
1.
a military rifle capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge.


Until some anti gun nutcase got it into their mind to push an agenda now it's this.
2.
a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usually modified to allow only semiautomatic fire.

If the neo assault weapons are so effective why doesn't the military use them?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You wouldn't discuss the fact that you could buy an adjustable stock with a pistol grip on hundreds of different websites and turn a 10/22 rifle into an assault weapon? Why not?

I don't know how many times I have too tell you this, but just because something looks like an assault weapon does not make it one.

It actually has to function like one.

Hello......McFly?????


I also don't know how many times I have to tell you this:

The discussion in this thread is centered around a potential assault weapons ban. An assault weapon is defined under the law in the previous Federal ban as well as in some existing state bans. In regard to an assault weapons ban it really doesn't matter what you think is or isn't an assault weapon. What matters is how an assault weapon is defined under the law. There is nothing at all about selective fire or full auto function in the definition of an assault weapon under the law.

This is what an assault weapon use to be
assault rifle 
noun
1.
a military rifle capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge.


Until some anti gun nutcase got it into their mind to push an agenda now it's this.
2.
a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usually modified to allow only semiautomatic fire.

If the neo assault weapons are so effective why doesn't the military use them?

 

[paulitician]

Yes, defending & following the Constitution is considered "Fanatical" by Socialist/Progressive assholes. And who reads the NY Times?...Fellow Socialist/Progressive assholes. Nuff said.