Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Like all useful idiots, your masters' agenda is more important to you than knowledge and honesty.A machine gun with only one round in it wouldn't be much of a machine would it? A hundred round magazine in a semi auto could be emptied in a minute, it's the uninterrupted fire that makes them similar.No. The distinguishing characteristic is the capcity to fire full-auto.
Like all useful idiots, your masters' agenda is more important to you than knowledge and honesty.
You can neither show that any such ban is constitutional, nor that there is any sense to it.But ban weapons which accept large capacity mags and ban the magazines. It's Constitutional and common sense.
You can neither show that any such ban is constitutional, nor that there is any sense to it.But ban weapons which accept large capacity mags and ban the magazines. It's Constitutional and common sense.
Man this guy is full of it, he hasn't a clue as to what he is talking about.
You can neither show that any such ban is constitutional, nor that there is any sense to it.
Man this guy is full of it, he hasn't a clue as to what he is talking about.
Back at 'ya
We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine. These magazines are not made to fit hunting rifles,they are for assault rifles.
Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.
Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.
Well at least we have a recognition of each other I'm brave and you are a coward.Well then brave man. You don't have anything to fear from a person who owns weapon then. So, you have no reason to take the rights away from others if you are so brave.What does that mean?
A gun does not give you courage?
How many times do you see the president out and about without the secret service and their guns to protect him...those guns seem to give him courage.
Cowards cling tightest to their guns. I've raised four children in the Los Angeles area. I've never had a firearm for protection. Anyone trying to sneak into my house will have to deal with my aluminum T-ball bat.
What stopped him was HE WAS SLOW reloading. A machine gun is a fully automatic weapon. They can be mounted, or they can be hand held or they can have a bipod. Machine guns are typically belt fed or drum fed. Belts and drums typically have 80 to several hundreds of rounds and the mode of fire must be automatic to be "machine gun." We all recognize that a 10 round magazine scares the crap out of you, but regardless, rifles of any kind account for very few homicides every year in the US. In fact, get the statistics of the total gun deaths average a year. Every source will tell you half are suicides so we discount them off hand. The same source will tell you that between 25% and 30% are gang on gang/drug murders so subtract them out. Now take the 20 to 25% and subtract all of the cops and victims taking out criminals and how many do we have left? Not very many. In fact our homicide rate then compares to the UK with all of its fancy gun control.It takes more than a large capacity magazine to make it an assault weapon. It also takes more than semi-automatic to make it an assault weapon. Many look a likes have been called assault weapons erroneously. The most important tell is the mode of fire; either burst of 3 or full automatic are required to be a true assault weapon.
The issue of the magazine is separate and should be addressed separately. But even so, banning large capacity magazines does little to make the shooter less lethal as anyone with a little experience can use smaller capacity mags to do as much or more damage than one with a large magazine. According to the State Police in Connecticut, the shooter at the school changed magazines 3 times. He obviously did the change fast enough to prevent anyone from stopping him.
That said, I have no problem with large capacity magazines being banned. I don't need one and haven't since my last combat tour in the Army. Even then shooting many times without changing mags was more a convenience than a need. A shooter can hit more targets shooting one aimed shot at a time than rapid fire burst or full auto.
When ever I read about some gun control freak wanting to ban assault weapons I have to laugh at the ignorance behind his interest.
And when I hear of gun control freaks whining about militias not existing unless the people are trained I laugh again at their ignorance and just refer them to the US Code 10 Para 311.
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. (This latter militia consists of warm bodies of the proper age who will be trained by professionals as needed or OJT if required)
Again, stop getting bogged down by the definition of an assault weapon, it's the amount of rounds available to be fired without stopping. Call the gun what you like. But ban weapons which accept large capacity mags and ban the magazines. It's Constitutional and common sense.
And for all you who are going to say so what, you could just carry extra 10 round clips, well don't forget that in the Gabby Giffords shooting the gunman was only stopped when he had to reload.
I did. Several posts back in my first response to this topic. You didnt respond, so those points still stand.Why don't you address my point directlyLike all useful idiots, your masters' agenda is more important to you than knowledge and honesty.A machine gun with only one round in it wouldn't be much of a machine would it? A hundred round magazine in a semi auto could be emptied in a minute, it's the uninterrupted fire that makes them similar.
I'd bet it was close to zero, and I'd bet none of them were assault rifles legaly owned by civilians.In 2010 there around 31,000 deaths by guns. Do you know how many of those were from assault rifles? Roughly 300.We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine. These magazines are not made to fit hunting rifles,they are for assault rifles.
Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.
Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.
Unquestionably.The Heller Court, when reaffirming Miller, determined that weapons considered ‘dangerous and unusual’ ' were not entitled to Second Amendment protection. To compare an AR 15 to a fully automatic rifle, or a sawed-off shotgun, for that matter, is idiocy – there is no legitimate civilian use for a fully automatic weapon or a sawed-off shotgun, whereas a semi-auto AR 15 has a legitimate civilian use as a sporting and target rifle; it clearly falls into the ‘in common use’ category, and possession of this firearm is consequently protected.
There's a well reasoned argument!
It takes more than a large capacity magazine to make it an assault weapon. It also takes more than semi-automatic to make it an assault weapon. Many look a likes have been called assault weapons erroneously. The most important tell is the mode of fire; either burst of 3 or full automatic are required to be a true assault weapon.
The issue of the magazine is separate and should be addressed separately. But even so, banning large capacity magazines does little to make the shooter less lethal as anyone with a little experience can use smaller capacity mags to do as much or more damage than one with a large magazine. According to the State Police in Connecticut, the shooter at the school changed magazines 3 times. He obviously did the change fast enough to prevent anyone from stopping him.
That said, I have no problem with large capacity magazines being banned. I don't need one and haven't since my last combat tour in the Army. Even then shooting many times without changing mags was more a convenience than a need. A shooter can hit more targets shooting one aimed shot at a time than rapid fire burst or full auto.
When ever I read about some gun control freak wanting to ban assault weapons I have to laugh at the ignorance behind his interest.
And when I hear of gun control freaks whining about militias not existing unless the people are trained I laugh again at their ignorance and just refer them to the US Code 10 Para 311.
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. (This latter militia consists of warm bodies of the proper age who will be trained by professionals as needed or OJT if required)
(This latter militia consists of warm bodies of the proper age who will be trained by professionals as needed or OJT if required)
That said, I have no problem with large capacity magazines being banned. I don't need one and haven't since my last combat tour in the Army.
I'd bet it was close to zero, and I'd bet none of them were assault rifles legaly owned by civilians.In 2010 there around 31,000 deaths by guns. Do you know how many of those were from assault rifles? Roughly 300.We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine. These magazines are not made to fit hunting rifles,they are for assault rifles.
Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.
Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.
While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
323 murders involving rifles, 2011.No, it was around 300. I think the exact number was 323. Feel free to check the FBI statistics on it.I'd bet it was close to zero, and I'd bet none of them were assault rifles legaly owned by civilians.In 2010 there around 31,000 deaths by guns. Do you know how many of those were from assault rifles? Roughly 300.
In fact, this is exactly what the unorganized militia is. I don't believe it has anything to do with the right to keep and bear arms. But when someone questioned the validity of a militia I looked it up. Here is the law:THIS IS YOUR OPINION AND NOT PART OF THE DEFINITION OF THE UNORGANIZED MILITIA
We may disagree about the need for large capacity magazines and what actual military grade assault weapons are, but I suspect we agree on most everything else about gun control.
BTW, I am not, nor have I ever been a statist.
In fact, this is exactly what the unorganized militia is. I don't believe it has anything to do with the right to keep and bear arms. But when someone questioned the validity of a militia I looked it up. Here is the law:THIS IS YOUR OPINION AND NOT PART OF THE DEFINITION OF THE UNORGANIZED MILITIA
10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes | Title 10 - Armed Forces | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information InstituteUS Code 10 Para 311.
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
We may disagree about the need for large capacity magazines and what actual military grade assault weapons are, but I suspect we agree on most everything else about gun control.
BTW, I am not, nor have I ever been a statist.
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. (This latter militia consists of warm bodies of the proper age who will be trained by professionals as needed or OJT if required)
You posted this and added the bold part which does not exist in the definition of the unorganized militia.
While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
My mind's eye sees things from a Hollywood movie.
