Assault Weapon Ban Poll.

[AVG-JOE]

Listen to Leroy Pyle

[youtube]YjM9fcEzSJ0[/youtube]

and give me some fucking flame throwers, tanks and 50 caliber sniper rifles!

According to Officer Pyle, by definition 'Assault Weapons' are fully automatic.

These are, apparently, already banned and only available to military and law enforcement.

So yes, I support a ban on 'Assault Weapons', using the definition given by Officer Pyle.

Was this a trick question poll?

-Joe

 

[Anguille]

Only water guns.

I prefer a bow and arrow.

 

[AVG-JOE]

I suggest you learn to read, there are 10 criteria, any 3 of which make it an "assault" weapon.

One criteria is semi automatic.

One criteria is any kind of pistol grip.

One criteria is a muzzle flash suppressor.

One criteria is a bayonet lug.

One criteria is a detachable magazine.

One criteria is a folding stock.

I don't remember the other 4. But as you can see a LOT of rifles that are NOT M-16 or AK-47's can and do meet the supposed "assault weapon" criteria.

The Supreme Court decision in 1939, White Vs Texas , was clear, a weapon MUST meet military use and be a style the military HAS or will use.

The "assault weapon" Ban is unconstitutional. It specifically outlaws the VERY weapons required to meet the protection of the Second Amendment.

Having won the DC case, I suspect that if this idiotic law comes up again it WILL be challenged and the Court will agree it is unconstitutional. In the past everyone was afraid they would lose. Neither side was willing to risk that loss.

Wait a minute, RGS... The video that Shogun posted stated clearly that the press using the term 'Assault Weapon' to describe a semi-automatic weapon was sensationalist bullshit. Where did you get the definitions you list above? Are they from the ban that expired? This is new information that would make me change my vote to "no opinion - bullshit question revolving around contradictory definitions of 'assault weapon'".

-Joe

 

[Missourian]

Yeah, should any weapon be banned? After all we have the right to bear arms so why shouldn't we be allowed to own any and all weapons available?

Actually, that's a good question.

I can only answer it with my own opinion.

IMO legal personal long guns should be dual use.

A semi-automatic rifle can be used for hunting and their is a need IE varmint hunting.

A semi-automatic shotgun in addition to hunting, is also used for shooting sports, like skeet.

I don't know of any legitimate civilian dual purpose for a fully-automatic rifle, or a tank, or a B-2 bomber.

Even in the military, the M-16 full-auto setting was primarily only advised to be used in suppressive fire situations, to conserve ammo. After my discharge, the M-16 A2 was issued with a 3-round burst setting for the same reason.

From Wikipedia:

The action was also modified, replacing the fully-automatic setting with a three-round burst setting.[2] When using a fully-automatic weapon, poorly trained troops often hold down the trigger and "spray" when under fire. The U.S. Army concluded that three-shot groups provide an optimum combination of ammunition conservation, accuracy and firepower. There are mechanical flaws in the M16A2 burst mechanism. The trigger group does not reset when the trigger is released. If the user releases the trigger between the second and third round of the burst, for example, the next trigger pull would only result in a single shot. Even in semi-automatic mode, the trigger group mechanism affects weapon handling. With each round fired, the trigger group cycles through one of the three stages of the burst mechanism. Worse, the trigger pull at each of these stages may vary as much as 6 lbf (27 N) in pressure differential, detracting from accuracy.

 

[Missourian]

Wait a minute, RGS... The video that Shogun posted stated clearly that the press using the term 'Assault Weapon' to describe a semi-automatic weapon was sensationalist bullshit. Where did you get the definitions you list above? Are they from the ban that expired? This is new information that would make me change my vote to "no opinion - bullshit question revolving around contradictory definitions of 'assault weapon'".

-Joe

Joe, allow me to clarify it for you.

A true Assault Weapon has a fully automatic setting. (Pyle)

An Assault Rifle as defined by the Clinton ban and Obama's proposed ban is what RGS posted.

This poll refers to the proposed ban. Hence the name "Assault Weapon Ban Poll".

I hope that clears things up.

 

[PeterS]

Actually, that's a good question.

I can only answer it with my own opinion.

IMO legal personal long guns should be dual use.

A semi-automatic rifle can be used for hunting and their is a need IE varmint hunting.

A semi-automatic shotgun in addition to hunting, is also used for shooting sports, like skeet.

I don't know of any legitimate civilian dual purpose for a fully-automatic rifle, or a tank, or a B-2 bomber.

Even in the military, the M-16 full-auto setting was primarily only advised to be used in suppressive fire situations, to conserve ammo. After my discharge, the M-16 A2 was issued with a 3-round burst setting for the same reason.

I thought the issue was the right to bear arms. What does hunting have to do with anything? No one is arguing that a 9mm Glock can also be used to hunt squirrels are they? As for a fully automatic weapon, or any weapon of our choice, why shouldn't we be allowed to have them? If this is our constitutional right isn't this what the argument should be about?

 

[Missourian]

I thought the issue was the right to bear arms. What does hunting have to do with anything? No one is arguing that a 9mm Glock can also be used to hunt squirrels are they? As for a fully automatic weapon, or any weapon of our choice, why shouldn't we be allowed to have them? If this is our constitutional right isn't this what the argument should be about?

OK, you win, you've convinced me, we should have everything. I'll be waiting for you to lead the charge on Capitol Hill.

 

[Shogun]

Only water guns.

I prefer a bow and arrow.

isn't there really only one reason for a bow and arrow though: to kill?


Go tell your significant other to take you to a shooting range for some target shooting. You might just like it.

 

[Shogun]

OK, you win, you've convinced me, we should have everything. I'll be waiting for you to lead the charge on Capitol Hill.

fucking A. Lets DO THIS.


for real, lets let old people use flamethrowers on their icy driveways instead of falling and fracturing a hip while having a heart attack shoveling the snow. Let's make outmoded tanks the next ATV muddin' rage. Let's enjoy some recreational lethal weapons.

 

[strollingbones]

Nobody has voted 'Yes' yet? I can't believe that. I thought there were a lot of Obama-type liberals around here.

there are but contary to the lies and rumours you like to spread...we own guns....dont make me shoot myself in the foot to prove it

 

[strollingbones]

fucking A. Lets DO THIS.


for real, lets let old people use flamethrowers on their icy driveways instead of falling and fracturing a hip while having a heart attack shoveling the snow. Let's make outmoded tanks the next ATV muddin' rage. Let's enjoy some recreational lethal weapons.

dont fuck with old peeps:


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNu0sR89_BM]YouTube - Awesome Homemade Flamethrower[/ame]

 

[strollingbones]

easiest homemade flame thrower...a can of hairspray and a bic

 

[Silence]

isn't there really only one reason for a bow and arrow though: to kill?


Go tell your significant other to take you to a shooting range for some target shooting. You might just like it.

what does one have to do with the other?

I've fired a gun before...an M-16 in fact. When I was married and they had wives day at the shooting range my husband thought it would be a good idea to bring me down and "teach" me how to fire a weapon. I'd never touched a gun much less fired one at that point. He set the sight for me and his sarg told me what I was supposed to do. The targets would pop up and I was to fire at them as quickly and accurately as possible. they put me in the "fox hole" that my husband fired from and the fun began. I ended up shooting expert and completely shocking everyone standing around including my husband who wasn't too happy that his sarg teased him that I was a better shot than he was. I had fun doing it and would do it again under supervision and strict guidelines.

Firing a semi-auto rifle for practice or for fun on a shooting range isn't the same as having one in your home. I don't believe in the necessity of owning a SEMI-AUTOMATIC rifle. Rifles are meant for long range/distance shooting, not protection of your home and certainly not hunting, not if you're a sportsman hunter anyway.

now a handgun? sure, if it makes you feel safer and IF you pass the background check that should be required.

Statistic show that more gunowners are hurt or injured with their own weapons than criminals they stop. and I esp believe if you have children in the house you shouldn't have guns of any kind. Get a security system people not a gun.

 

[dilloduck]

what does one have to do with the other?

I've fired a gun before...an M-16 in fact. When I was married and they had wives day at the shooting range my husband thought it would be a good idea to bring me down and "teach" me how to fire a weapon. I'd never touched a gun much less fired one at that point. He set the sight for me and his sarg told me what I was supposed to do. The targets would pop up and I was to fire at them as quickly and accurately as possible. they put me in the "fox hole" that my husband fired from and the fun began. I ended up shooting expert and completely shocking everyone standing around including my husband who wasn't too happy that his sarg teased him that I was a better shot than he was. I had fun doing it and would do it again under supervision and strict guidelines.

Firing a semi-auto rifle for practice or for fun on a shooting range isn't the same as having one in your home. I don't believe in the necessity of owning a SEMI-AUTOMATIC rifle. Rifles are meant for long range/distance shooting, not protection of your home and certainly not hunting, not if you're a sportsman hunter anyway.

now a handgun? sure, if it makes you feel safer and IF you pass the background check that should be required.

Statistic show that more gunowners are hurt or injured with their own weapons than criminals they stop. and I esp believe if you have children in the house you shouldn't have guns of any kind. Get a security system people not a gun.

yes---if you want loud alarms going of while you and your family are being killed a security system is a great idea.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Joe, allow me to clarify it for you.

A true Assault Weapon has a fully automatic setting. (Pyle)

An Assault Rifle as defined by the Clinton ban and Obama's proposed ban is what RGS posted.

This poll refers to the proposed ban. Hence the name "Assault Weapon Ban Poll".

I hope that clears things up.

It does...

I support keeping fully automatic weapons out of the hands of civilians.

I also like what you said about dual use...

Common sense, of course decries that purchasers of any firearm be subject to some sort of screening process, using a national data base would be best.

Please don't anyone get your panties in a bunch - I am still glad I voted for Obama, I just hope he doesn't waste a lot of the peoples time pursuing a ban of semi-automatic weapons... there are much bigger political fish to fry over the next 4 years.

-Joe

 

[Missourian]

fucking A. Lets DO THIS.


for real, lets let old people use flamethrowers on their icy driveways instead of falling and fracturing a hip while having a heart attack shoveling the snow. Let's make outmoded tanks the next ATV muddin' rage. Let's enjoy some recreational lethal weapons.

You won't believe what they do with decommissioned Abrams tanks.

Being partially constructed of depleted uranium armor, they could not (or were not permitted to, I don't know which) be recycled. So they would remove the engines, transmissions and hydraulics, steam clean them to new/sterile condition and....drop them in the ocean positioned in a row to form off shore coral reefs. Go figure.

 

[Amanda]

I don't think there should be a ban on semiautomatic weapons. I've thought about getting a small handgun to carry in my purse when I have to be out late. I grew up in a family of gun owners so I know well how to use one and be safe. And it would make me feel better at night in the city.

 

[Gunny]

what does one have to do with the other?

I've fired a gun before...an M-16 in fact. When I was married and they had wives day at the shooting range my husband thought it would be a good idea to bring me down and "teach" me how to fire a weapon. I'd never touched a gun much less fired one at that point. He set the sight for me and his sarg told me what I was supposed to do. The targets would pop up and I was to fire at them as quickly and accurately as possible. they put me in the "fox hole" that my husband fired from and the fun began. I ended up shooting expert and completely shocking everyone standing around including my husband who wasn't too happy that his sarg teased him that I was a better shot than he was. I had fun doing it and would do it again under supervision and strict guidelines.

Firing a semi-auto rifle for practice or for fun on a shooting range isn't the same as having one in your home. I don't believe in the necessity of owning a SEMI-AUTOMATIC rifle. Rifles are meant for long range/distance shooting, not protection of your home and certainly not hunting, not if you're a sportsman hunter anyway.

now a handgun? sure, if it makes you feel safer and IF you pass the background check that should be required.

Statistic show that more gunowners are hurt or injured with their own weapons than criminals they stop. and I esp believe if you have children in the house you shouldn't have guns of any kind. Get a security system people not a gun.

I have several security systems in various calibers. I'm not waiting on anyone to come save me. My children grew up with guns in the house and they are fine. How it works when you teach them right.

Odd, but I was under the impression a true, by-definition liberal wouoldn't be concerned with what I have or do in the privacy of my own home. Seems I've heard that argument somewhere ....

 

[Anguille]

isn't there really only one reason for a bow and arrow though: to kill?

Target practice on your heart, Soggy dog.

Go tell your significant other to take you to a shooting range for some target shooting. You might just like it.

I don't think so. I don't like loud noises and I am way too near sighted.

 

[LOki]

I see no reason for assualt rifles. If you're a hunter, then hunt like a real man with a one shot shotgun. Give the animal a fighting chance.

The fualty presumption here is that assault rifle ownership is about hunting, and not about defending yourself against criminals with assault rifles.

Should you give criminals with assault rifles a fighting chance?

now a handgun? sure, if it makes you feel safer and IF you pass the background check that should be required.

Why? Exactly what information will be revealed by a background check?

Statistic show that more gunowners are hurt or injured with their own weapons than criminals they stop.

A lie.

and I esp believe if you have children in the house you shouldn't have guns of any kind.

Yes; for children, where education, and thoughtfully responsible exposure are the keys for reducing racism, unsafe sex and drug abuse; fear, hatred, and ignorance are the keys to preventing gun related accidents and tragedies.