Question for gun enthusiast.

[RetiredGySgt]

Wrong again tojo. There are multiple cases where bad guys have been shot multiple times, all critical wounds, and they keep on fighting.

Take your movie crap back to your playpen.

well I suppose if you hit then in the heart or break their spine

 

[The Republicans]

Lots of talk about bump stocks and high rate of fire rifles. I understand there is a constitutional right to bear arms, but on a practical level, is there any reason for high rate of fire for anything other than self-defense? Obviously, if you are defending your home from attackers, you need that high rate of fire, and extended capacity, but are there any other circumstances where a high rate of fire and extended capacity are required?

Be a libertarian and mind your business

 

[BULLDOG]

Be a libertarian and mind your business

You mean like all the libertarians that supported trump's anti-Row-v-Wade and anti-gay actions?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Wrong again tojo. There are multiple cases where bad guys have been shot multiple times, all critical wounds, and they keep on fighting.

Take your movie crap back to your playpen.

It’s also damned hard to put a round in the right place under the stresses of combat. Highly trained people like SEALs and Delta Force can’t always manage it and they train for marksmanship under stress all the time,

 

[AZrailwhale]

You mean like all the libertarians that supported trump's anti-Row-v-Wade and anti-gay actions?

SCOTUS merely sent abortion back to the states where it belonged. Even the ultra-liberal Ruth Bader-Ginsberg said Roe-v-Wade was bad law.

 

[westwall]

well I suppose if you hit then in the heart or break their spine

Only a head shot is nearly guaranteed. And even there you have the occasional miracle dude who shrugs it off.

 

[2aguy]

You mean like all the libertarians that supported trump's anti-Row-v-Wade and anti-gay actions?

What anti-Roe and anti-gay actions?

We will wait for your non-response.

 

[SavannahMann]

Lots of talk about bump stocks and high rate of fire rifles. I understand there is a constitutional right to bear arms, but on a practical level, is there any reason for high rate of fire for anything other than self-defense? Obviously, if you are defending your home from attackers, you need that high rate of fire, and extended capacity, but are there any other circumstances where a high rate of fire and extended capacity are required?

I’m going to do what is likely nobody has. Explain rapid fire, high rate of fire, and why they are flashy but useless.

When you fire a weapon, Newton’s third law of motion comes into play. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. All the force that launches the bullet is transmitted back to the weapon in the opposite direction.

This is called recoil, or kick. This recoil causes muzzle rise because of the design of the weapons. It can be reduced, but not really eliminated. Things like compensators or porting can reduce this muzzle rise or flip.

The Army in my era got rid of fully automatic in the hands of the soldiers. Giving them three round burst instead. This was a wheel that stopped the automatic action after three rounds in the trigger mechanism.

For a right handed shooter, this is because the weapon would normally pull up and to the right. After three rounds the shooter wasn’t on target anymore, and was spraying bullets into the sky.

Bump Stocks are even dumber. They use the recoil to reset the single action trigger for another shot. The shooter pushes forward and the weapon bounces back and forth. Recoiling backwards, and resetting the trigger, to be pushed forward where the trigger is depressed again.

As for accuracy. Honestly if a guy could get ten rounds out of a thirty round magazine on the paper at fifty yards I’d be astonished. It is a spray and pray technique. Like the anti aircraft technique of World War Two. Throw a bunch of junk in the air and home something hits.

You counter the inaccuracy of muzzle flip by pulling the rifle in tight to the shoulder. You can’t do that with bump stocks. So it is even less accurate than fully automatic.

That isn’t to say fully automatic is accurate. Automatic fire is used as an area weapon, spraying bullets in an area hoping to hit someone in the group. Or a suppression device. Used to force the enemy to duck their own heads and not shoot at your guys.

There is more to it. But that is a general overview that describes the technology and uses.

Both are expensive to play with, and other than allowing the individual to scream in manly joy at the feeling, pretty much useless.

 

[BULLDOG]

I’m going to do what is likely nobody has. Explain rapid fire, high rate of fire, and why they are flashy but useless.

When you fire a weapon, Newton’s third law of motion comes into play. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. All the force that launches the bullet is transmitted back to the weapon in the opposite direction.

This is called recoil, or kick. This recoil causes muzzle rise because of the design of the weapons. It can be reduced, but not really eliminated. Things like compensators or porting can reduce this muzzle rise or flip.

The Army in my era got rid of fully automatic in the hands of the soldiers. Giving them three round burst instead. This was a wheel that stopped the automatic action after three rounds in the trigger mechanism.

For a right handed shooter, this is because the weapon would normally pull up and to the right. After three rounds the shooter wasn’t on target anymore, and was spraying bullets into the sky.

Bump Stocks are even dumber. They use the recoil to reset the single action trigger for another shot. The shooter pushes forward and the weapon bounces back and forth. Recoiling backwards, and resetting the trigger, to be pushed forward where the trigger is depressed again.

As for accuracy. Honestly if a guy could get ten rounds out of a thirty round magazine on the paper at fifty yards I’d be astonished. It is a spray and pray technique. Like the anti aircraft technique of World War Two. Throw a bunch of junk in the air and home something hits.

You counter the inaccuracy of muzzle flip by pulling the rifle in tight to the shoulder. You can’t do that with bump stocks. So it is even less accurate than fully automatic.

That isn’t to say fully automatic is accurate. Automatic fire is used as an area weapon, spraying bullets in an area hoping to hit someone in the group. Or a suppression device. Used to force the enemy to duck their own heads and not shoot at your guys.

There is more to it. But that is a general overview that describes the technology and uses.

Both are expensive to play with, and other than allowing the individual to scream in manly joy at the feeling, pretty much useless.

All that is true, but immaterial. Gun nuts don't care about things like that.

 

[Vrenn]

I’m going to do what is likely nobody has. Explain rapid fire, high rate of fire, and why they are flashy but useless.

In something bigger than a 7.62 it has it's uses. in combat. Otherwise, it's a novelty only.

When you fire a weapon, Newton’s third law of motion comes into play. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. All the force that launches the bullet is transmitted back to the weapon in the opposite direction.

Not so in a recoilless rifle. And the AR series has very little kickback. I won't go into why but let's just say, it probably qualifies as a recoilless.

This is called recoil, or kick. This recoil causes muzzle rise because of the design of the weapons. It can be reduced, but not really eliminated. Things like compensators or porting can reduce this muzzle rise or flip.

The Army in my era got rid of fully automatic in the hands of the soldiers. Giving them three round burst instead. This was a wheel that stopped the automatic action after three rounds in the trigger mechanism.

The 11th Combat Commandment, "Thou Shalt Not Run Out Of Ammo".

For a right handed shooter, this is because the weapon would normally pull up and to the right. After three rounds the shooter wasn’t on target anymore, and was spraying bullets into the sky.

It all depends on the pressure the person gives to the weapon. And in a fully auto setting, you aren't on target past the 1st shot unless you spend an extraordinary amount of time at the range. This is why the normal setting on an M-16 or M-4 is in the semi auto position.

Bump Stocks are even dumber. They use the recoil to reset the single action trigger for another shot. The shooter pushes forward and the weapon bounces back and forth. Recoiling backwards, and resetting the trigger, to be pushed forward where the trigger is depressed again.

Normally, that is true. Read on.

As for accuracy. Honestly if a guy could get ten rounds out of a thirty round magazine on the paper at fifty yards I’d be astonished. It is a spray and pray technique. Like the anti aircraft technique of World War Two. Throw a bunch of junk in the air and home something hits.

The Nevada Shooter had 3 ARs with bumpstocks on them and he used them. He killed and wounded a lot of music lovers that day.

You counter the inaccuracy of muzzle flip by pulling the rifle in tight to the shoulder. You can’t do that with bump stocks. So it is even less accurate than fully automatic.

It's only accurate on the first shot. After that, it's willy nilly as the barrel walks.

That isn’t to say fully automatic is accurate. Automatic fire is used as an area weapon, spraying bullets in an area hoping to hit someone in the group. Or a suppression device. Used to force the enemy to duck their own heads and not shoot at your guys.

When you are carrying only 4 mags of 30, you really can't use the full auto setting unless you are being overrun and the bogies are close, real close. I would say it's a kiss your ass goodbye where you take as many of the bad guys with you as possible.

There is more to it. But that is a general overview that describes the technology and uses.

Both are expensive to play with, and other than allowing the individual to scream in manly joy at the feeling, pretty much useless.

It's along the same way as owning a truck. The bigger and smokier the truck is, the smaller the male parts.

 

[AZrailwhale]

In something bigger than a 7.62 it has it's uses. in combat. Otherwise, it's a novelty only.




Not so in a recoilless rifle. And the AR series has very little kickback. I won't go into why but let's just say, it probably qualifies as a recoilless.



The 11th Combat Commandment, "Thou Shalt Not Run Out Of Ammo".



It all depends on the pressure the person gives to the weapon. And in a fully auto setting, you aren't on target past the 1st shot unless you spend an extraordinary amount of time at the range. This is why the normal setting on an M-16 or M-4 is in the semi auto position.




Normally, that is true. Read on.





The Nevada Shooter had 3 ARs with bumpstocks on them and he used them. He killed and wounded a lot of music lovers that day.



It's only accurate on the first shot. After that, it's willy nilly as the barrel walks.



When you are carrying only 4 mags of 30, you really can't use the full auto setting unless you are being overrun and the bogies are close, real close. I would say it's a kiss your ass goodbye where you take as many of the bad guys with you as possible.



It's along the same way as owning a truck. The bigger and smokier the truck is, the smaller the male parts.

Recoiless rifles are a perfect example of Newton’s law, they vent blast to the rear to balance the recoil. AR-15s/M-16s/M-4s have little felt recoil because they have a buffer spring in the but that absorbs recoil and a “straight line” design the limits muzzle climb.

 

[SavannahMann]

In something bigger than a 7.62 it has it's uses. in combat. Otherwise, it's a novelty only.

You should have responded to someone else. I tried out for the Rifle and Pistol team at Fort Bragg. I also graduated from the two week long Machine Gunners Course for the 82nd Airborne with an Expert Badge. Oh, when I was squad driver I was also the gunner for our Primary Anti Tank weapon. A M-67 90MM Recoilless Rifle.

Not so in a recoilless rifle. And the AR series has very little kickback. I won't go into why but let's just say, it probably qualifies as a recoilless.

It really doesn’t. The AR platform in use by the army. I fired the A1 on full rock and roll. Nobody can keep it on target past fifty yards. I fired the A2 on burst. You learned to aim low left. On full auto you had three seconds of ammo on full auto with a 30 round magazine. Without a bipod or something to brace the weapon on you just were not keeping the rounds on target.

A Recoilless Rifle is actually a big tube that fires odd rounds. The rounds have a back blast panel. Newton’s Third Law is obeyed by having equal force go out the back as the front.

This is a recoilless rifle like I used. Same model.



The recoilless rifle made you feel like you had been bounced off the ground by an angry giant when you fired it. And with earplugs your hearing was down for the rest of the day.

The 11th Combat Commandment, "Thou Shalt Not Run Out Of Ammo".



It all depends on the pressure the person gives to the weapon. And in a fully auto setting, you aren't on target past the 1st shot unless you spend an extraordinary amount of time at the range. This is why the normal setting on an M-16 or M-4 is in the semi auto position.



The Nevada Shooter had 3 ARs with bumpstocks on them and he used them. He killed and wounded a lot of music lovers that day.

No he really didn’t. Pollack fired more than 1,000 rounds, and wounded just over 400, and killed 60.

And he had more than a dozen weapons with bump stocks. But he had a kill ratio of 6%. That is atrocious. He could have done better with a medium caliber like .308 in a bolt action rifle.

Especially since he was at the far range for single targets. On an M-16A2 the point, or single target range is 550M. The army generally doesn’t shoot beyond 300 Meters. The Marines still shoot at 500 Meter targets.

I’m willing to bet most of the wounded were either through and through which got two people, or ricocheting ammo off the concrete pad the concert goers were on.

He had a densely packed group of people and was firing for at least ten minutes and managed to kill sixty.

The dumbass even fired at the actuation fuel with regular ammunition like that would set the fuel on fire.

It's only accurate on the first shot. After that, it's willy nilly as the barrel walks.



When you are carrying only 4 mags of 30, you really can't use the full auto setting unless you are being overrun and the bogies are close, real close. I would say it's a kiss your ass goodbye where you take as many of the bad guys with you as possible.



It's along the same way as owning a truck. The bigger and smokier the truck is, the smaller the male parts.

Ok. You start out claiming the AR platform is basically a recoilless rifle, and end claiming the barrels of M-16’s and M-4’s walk around Willy Nilly. Make up your mind my friend.

If you are going to be a shooter you need to learn the physics that govern everything about shooting. Long range shooting is an exercise in math. Everything has an effect on the flight of the bullet. Humidity, temperature, altitude, cold barrel versus warm barrel. At really long shots you have to factor in the rotation of the earth.

This was not a trained killer. This was a moron who thought he knew as much as a soldier.



This idiot just threw a bunch of lead in the general direction of a densely packed crowd and hoped he managed to kill some of them. The proof is in the weapons he went with.

He went with the .223 or 5.56. Those rounds were chosen because they create what is called militarily significant wounds. Let me explain what that means. If you kill the enemy there is no rush to move the corpse from the field of battle. If you wound him then two others are out of battle as they carry the guy to medical treatment. If you leave the guy there screaming and slowly dying from his wounds it destroys unit morale.

The .223 or 5.56 round tends to create horrific wounds in humans. But the bullets don’t kill as easily as most people think.

There are four ways a bullet kills.

1) Virtually Instant death. This is a shot to the head or heart. Generally speaking people don’t recover from those. There are exceptions, but that is a very low percentage.

2) Exsanguination. That is where the victim bleeds out and dies from blood loss. Bigger holes and deeper wounds make this happen much faster.

3) Suffocation. A lung shot will create a situation where pressure builds up in the chest and literally suffocates the victim, also blood can fill the lungs and cause the same result. The victim literally drowns in blood.

4) Everything else. This is the stuff that is implantable. This includes Shock, bits of bone or fat or even clots that enters the blood stream and causes a heart attack. Blood poisoning, which used to be called gangrene. And a couple dozen other complications I won’t bother listing. This category has killed in the past, and will be the cause of death in the future, but you can’t plan on it.

So with this knowledge why would any army choose the Cartridge? Several reasons. The ammo is lightweight and the soldiers can carry a lot. Most rounds fired are launched at the baddies to force them to keep their heads down. In that situation more ammo is more important than effectiveness. Ease of shooting. The rifles that use that ammo are easy to shoot with minimal recoil, especially compared to the 30-06 or 7.62 rounds used before. The rifle could be lighter which increases the mobility of the soldiers.

Everything in combat is a trade off. If you up armor the soldier to be impervious to direct fire, he ain’t gonna move fast. He probably has his body weight strapped to him in armor.

In Desert Storm my unit was still using Flack Jackets which were only marginally updated from Vietnam. We had Kevlar helmets, but that was it. The body armor wouldn’t stop rifle rounds. They would barely stop pistol rounds. They were intended to stop fragments from artillery.

They were heavy, and hot, and not very useful, but we wore them because we were told to.

By the same token. The .50 BMG is far more effective. So why not put one in every soldiers hand? Issue everyone a Heckete rifle. Give everyone a big rifle that shoots that effective cartridge. It’s slow to fire, and you can’t carry much ammo if you want to carry water, food, medical, or radios.

I’ve said this before. Hitting the baddie with a less than optimal cartridge is way better than having the perfect cartridge sail right on by.

 

[Vrenn]

You should have responded to someone else. I tried out for the Rifle and Pistol team at Fort Bragg. I also graduated from the two week long Machine Gunners Course for the 82nd Airborne with an Expert Badge. Oh, when I was squad driver I was also the gunner for our Primary Anti Tank weapon. A M-67 90MM Recoilless Rifle.



It really doesn’t. The AR platform in use by the army. I fired the A1 on full rock and roll. Nobody can keep it on target past fifty yards. I fired the A2 on burst. You learned to aim low left. On full auto you had three seconds of ammo on full auto with a 30 round magazine. Without a bipod or something to brace the weapon on you just were not keeping the rounds on target.

A Recoilless Rifle is actually a big tube that fires odd rounds. The rounds have a back blast panel. Newton’s Third Law is obeyed by having equal force go out the back as the front.

This is a recoilless rifle like I used. Same model.



The recoilless rifle made you feel like you had been bounced off the ground by an angry giant when you fired it. And with earplugs your hearing was down for the rest of the day.



No he really didn’t. Pollack fired more than 1,000 rounds, and wounded just over 400, and killed 60.

And he had more than a dozen weapons with bump stocks. But he had a kill ratio of 6%. That is atrocious. He could have done better with a medium caliber like .308 in a bolt action rifle.

Especially since he was at the far range for single targets. On an M-16A2 the point, or single target range is 550M. The army generally doesn’t shoot beyond 300 Meters. The Marines still shoot at 500 Meter targets.

I’m willing to bet most of the wounded were either through and through which got two people, or ricocheting ammo off the concrete pad the concert goers were on.

He had a densely packed group of people and was firing for at least ten minutes and managed to kill sixty.

The dumbass even fired at the actuation fuel with regular ammunition like that would set the fuel on fire.


Ok. You start out claiming the AR platform is basically a recoilless rifle, and end claiming the barrels of M-16’s and M-4’s walk around Willy Nilly. Make up your mind my friend.

If you are going to be a shooter you need to learn the physics that govern everything about shooting. Long range shooting is an exercise in math. Everything has an effect on the flight of the bullet. Humidity, temperature, altitude, cold barrel versus warm barrel. At really long shots you have to factor in the rotation of the earth.

This was not a trained killer. This was a moron who thought he knew as much as a soldier.



This idiot just threw a bunch of lead in the general direction of a densely packed crowd and hoped he managed to kill some of them. The proof is in the weapons he went with.

He went with the .223 or 5.56. Those rounds were chosen because they create what is called militarily significant wounds. Let me explain what that means. If you kill the enemy there is no rush to move the corpse from the field of battle. If you wound him then two others are out of battle as they carry the guy to medical treatment. If you leave the guy there screaming and slowly dying from his wounds it destroys unit morale.

The .223 or 5.56 round tends to create horrific wounds in humans. But the bullets don’t kill as easily as most people think.

There are four ways a bullet kills.

1) Virtually Instant death. This is a shot to the head or heart. Generally speaking people don’t recover from those. There are exceptions, but that is a very low percentage.

2) Exsanguination. That is where the victim bleeds out and dies from blood loss. Bigger holes and deeper wounds make this happen much faster.

3) Suffocation. A lung shot will create a situation where pressure builds up in the chest and literally suffocates the victim, also blood can fill the lungs and cause the same result. The victim literally drowns in blood.

4) Everything else. This is the stuff that is implantable. This includes Shock, bits of bone or fat or even clots that enters the blood stream and causes a heart attack. Blood poisoning, which used to be called gangrene. And a couple dozen other complications I won’t bother listing. This category has killed in the past, and will be the cause of death in the future, but you can’t plan on it.

So with this knowledge why would any army choose the Cartridge? Several reasons. The ammo is lightweight and the soldiers can carry a lot. Most rounds fired are launched at the baddies to force them to keep their heads down. In that situation more ammo is more important than effectiveness. Ease of shooting. The rifles that use that ammo are easy to shoot with minimal recoil, especially compared to the 30-06 or 7.62 rounds used before. The rifle could be lighter which increases the mobility of the soldiers.

Everything in combat is a trade off. If you up armor the soldier to be impervious to direct fire, he ain’t gonna move fast. He probably has his body weight strapped to him in armor.

In Desert Storm my unit was still using Flack Jackets which were only marginally updated from Vietnam. We had Kevlar helmets, but that was it. The body armor wouldn’t stop rifle rounds. They would barely stop pistol rounds. They were intended to stop fragments from artillery.

They were heavy, and hot, and not very useful, but we wore them because we were told to.

By the same token. The .50 BMG is far more effective. So why not put one in every soldiers hand? Issue everyone a Heckete rifle. Give everyone a big rifle that shoots that effective cartridge. It’s slow to fire, and you can’t carry much ammo if you want to carry water, food, medical, or radios.

I’ve said this before. Hitting the baddie with a less than optimal cartridge is way better than having the perfect cartridge sail right on by.

I first qualified on an AR-15 Model 601. That should tell you what service I was in. You fired qualified on the AR-15 Model 602 and up which is just another way of saying M-16. Our Model 601s ended up being modified to the M-16 standard and as far as I am concerned, they broke it. There has only been one mass shooting that a Combat qualified Veteran did and he did that with a handgun and he was a successful as the amateurs were and are with the AR-15 with or without a bump stock. You don't find a Retired Military doing that with that one exception. Luckily, that shooting was done in California and the shooter brought what could be legally purchased on short notice which would be a handgun. Had he brought an AR or the like with 4 30 round mags, he could have killed everyone in that nightclub instead of wounding but only killing 13. An active shooter isn't looking at the bullet. He's looking at using the best tool for the job and for mass shootings, the AR-15 is it.

The reason the Vegas Shooter did so poorly is that the 223 and 556 has trouble keeping up it's energy at that range. He fired over 1000 rounds of 223 ammo but he also fired 8 rounds from the AR-10. Want to bet that the 7.62 killed at a much higher percentage rate. The distance was just short 500yds which is at the very extreme range of the 223 but at the medium range for the 308 out of the AR-10. Luckily for everyone that he only had 2 AR-10s without large capacity mags. Had he had 1000 rounds already loaded in Mags for the 7.62, the body count would have been in the hundreds.

But the AR-10 does not have a cult following like the AR-15 has. I trained on both the AR-15 Model 601 AND the Remington M-741A (300 H&H Mag) Bolt action. And also all the way up to the Mah Deuce. And I spent a ton of time carrying the AR-15 Model 601 and found I could carry more ammo (shots) and the Rifle for longer times than the M-14 which I found as a dud. And I used the M-16 (modified 601) during an overrun where I melted down 6 of them. And yes, we did use full auto inside that bunker. Our job was to keep the bad guys off the M-60 and the Mah Deuces back that was also in the same bunker. We had an open 500 yd area from the Bunker to the Parameter fence and really didn't see the enemy. But I know, most of the killing was done by the M-60 and the M-2.

But for civilian uses, a fully auto gun is just an oddity with zero uses unless you have a Lamborghini Pocketbook for the ranges. The other reason would be mass killings.

 

[2aguy]

In something bigger than a 7.62 it has it's uses. in combat. Otherwise, it's a novelty only.




Not so in a recoilless rifle. And the AR series has very little kickback. I won't go into why but let's just say, it probably qualifies as a recoilless.



The 11th Combat Commandment, "Thou Shalt Not Run Out Of Ammo".



It all depends on the pressure the person gives to the weapon. And in a fully auto setting, you aren't on target past the 1st shot unless you spend an extraordinary amount of time at the range. This is why the normal setting on an M-16 or M-4 is in the semi auto position.




Normally, that is true. Read on.





The Nevada Shooter had 3 ARs with bumpstocks on them and he used them. He killed and wounded a lot of music lovers that day.



It's only accurate on the first shot. After that, it's willy nilly as the barrel walks.



When you are carrying only 4 mags of 30, you really can't use the full auto setting unless you are being overrun and the bogies are close, real close. I would say it's a kiss your ass goodbye where you take as many of the bad guys with you as possible.



It's along the same way as owning a truck. The bigger and smokier the truck is, the smaller the male parts.

The Las Vegas shooter only managed to murder 58 people because he was firing into a tightly packed arena filled with 22,000 people.......had they been able to disperse, he would not have been able to wound or kill as many as he did.....

Even with that, a muslim terrorist, in Nice, France, using a rental truck, murdered 86 people, and wounded 435.......more people murdered in 5 minutes than Las Vegas or any other mass public shooting in the United States.

Rental trucks are therefore, more deadly than AR-15 rifles with bump stocks.....rental Trucks must be banned.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Recoiless rifles are a perfect example of Newton’s law, they vent blast to the rear to balance the recoil. AR-15s/M-16s/M-4s have little felt recoil because they have a buffer spring in the but that absorbs recoil and a “straight line” design the limits muzzle climb.

Well, that and 5.56x45 is not particularly powerful.

 

[The Republicans]

You mean like all the libertarians that supported trump's anti-Row-v-Wade and anti-gay actions?

This is the way I look at it. This has turned into a slippery slope for so many reasons and I think it’s time to give it a rest because nether side is going to see an eye for an eye. The issue is dumb. It’s saying that I’m not an alcohol drinker so I think we should bring back the prohibition. No because that’s dumb

 

[BULLDOG]

This is the way I look at it. This has turned into a slippery slope for so many reasons and I think it’s time to give it a rest because nether side is going to see an eye for an eye. The issue is dumb. It’s saying that I’m not an alcohol drinker so I think we should bring back the prohibition. No because that’s dumb

Bullshit. There is no credible effort for a prohibition on guns. We have regulations to limit unsafe use of alcohol. You can't drive while drunk. Why not have common sense regulations for the top cause of death for children?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Bullshit. There is no credible effort for a prohibition on guns.

Democrats want to ban guns.
It's part of their party platform. Has been for decades.
Every congress. some Democrat introduces legislation to that effect.
And several states controlled by Democrats have such bans in place.

https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020-Democratic-Party-Platform.pdf

 

[BULLDOG]

Democrats want to ban guns.
It's part of their party platform. Has been for decades.
Every congress. some Democrat introduces legislation to that effect.
And several states controlled by Democrats have such bans in place.

https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020-Democratic-Party-Platform.pdf

Regulation and banning are not the same thing. Please quote the Democratic policy that would ban guns.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Regulation and banning are not the same thing.

Banning a gun regulates it.

Please quote the Democratic policy that would ban guns.

You didn't read the party platform?
You choose to remain ignorant?
Tsk.

"Democrats will ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high capacity magazines"

There you go.