This Republican has got it right.

[Winston]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

And the ones that commit roughly zero percent of the murders in this country.

So just to be clear, you read the Constitution and find where it says we need to justify needing our Constitutional rights protected. I don't see that qualification, can you show me where it says that?

Does that work with free speech? Religion? Due process? You think they start with a judicial hearing where you first prove you need them before you get them? You are actually this stupid, aren't you?

A little more than zero percent.

Results suggest assault weapons (primarily assault-type rifles) account for 2-12% of guns used in crime in general (most estimates suggest less than 7%) and 13-16% of guns used in murders of police. Assault weapons and other high-capacity semiautomatics together generally account for 22 to 36% of crime guns, with some estimates upwards of 40% for cases involving serious violence including murders of police. Assault weapons and other high-capacity semiautomatics appear to be used in a higher share of firearm mass murders (up to 57% in total)

Criminal Use of Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Semiautomatic Firearms: an Updated Examination of Local and National Sources - PubMed

Policies restricting semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines are intended to reduce gunshot victimizations by limiting the stock of semiautomatic firearms with large ammunition capacities and other military-style features conducive to criminal use. The federal...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

You know, if you Republicans really wanted to show your support for law enforcement, you would support a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

 

[OKTexas]

This man gets it.
I don't understand why other Republicans don't.

View attachment 508750

.

 

[Rigby5]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

If some weapon had no legitimate purpose, then why would anyone make or sell them?
Rifles like an AR-15 are some of the least powerful and least deadly rifles made.
The tiny .223 bullet was adopted by the military because they decided it made winning easier if they stopped killing people.
The bullet the AR-15 shoots is designed to not be able to kill, but to wound instead.
They are so weak that most states do not allow AR-15s to be used to hunt deer, as they are not lethal enough and cause a slow death.

But really, in a country founded by violent armed rebellion, and with all governments only lasting about 300 years before they become corrupt and need to be destroyed, anyone who does not have combat ready weapons in a democratic republic, is extremely irresponsible, to the point of being a traitor.

 

[kaz]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

And the ones that commit roughly zero percent of the murders in this country.

So just to be clear, you read the Constitution and find where it says we need to justify needing our Constitutional rights protected. I don't see that qualification, can you show me where it says that?

Does that work with free speech? Religion? Due process? You think they start with a judicial hearing where you first prove you need them before you get them? You are actually this stupid, aren't you?

Your justifications are all wild flights of fancy. Just say they are cool and you like to shoot them. Anyone can understand that reasoning. I'm not against having them, I just think the right's arguments of civil wars, fighting tyranny or zombie like invasions of city dwellers in the suburbs are ludicrous.

So you call assault weapons (they aren't) combat weapons (they aren't) that are used in virtually zero percent of murders and want to ban them to protect us. That while you're fine with leftists looting and burning American cities. You care about guns that commit virtually none of the murders while you're silent about the thousands of blacks killed in cities where they can't legally buy or own them.

You're fucked up, dude

 

[Orangecat]

I am far more left wing than anyone here, but that is all wrong.
There is no such thing as an assault rifle, and the models civilians can buy have no assault weapon characteristics.

First of all, an assault weapon is not a particular type, but how you use it.
Shotguns and a pair of pistols have often been used as assault weapons at different times in history.

There is no weapon that can kill 20 people in 10 seconds, but a high rate of fire requires a full auto feature which no civilian weapons have.
There also is no such thing as a rifle designed for military use.
The main difference is that military weapons tend to just be more crudely finished so are cheaper.

Third is that the whole point of a democratic republic is that the people are supposed to all be citizen soldiers.
That is how we rebelled successfully from the monarchy, and is how you prevent dictatorships.
Anyone who is not doing their part as a citizen soldier, is pretty much a traitor.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

This man gets it.
I don't understand why other Republicans don't.

View attachment 508750

You’re proof that voting eligibility should require the same scrutiny as jury duty.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

This man gets it.
I don't understand why other Republicans don't.

View attachment 508750

The Second Amendment was never about hunting deer.

It's about hunting tyrants and criminals.

 

[kaz]

Kaz is short for my home town, Kalamazoo

I played a gig at the State Theater there many years ago. Beautiful venue.

When I was a kid in the sixties and seventies, downtown was pretty run down. In recent years though it's really made a comeback.

If you go back, go to Bell's Brewery. The flatship brewery is near there and that's where they test out their ideas for new beers

 

[lennypartiv]

Mass shootings are part of living in a free and democratic country.

 

[kaz]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

And the ones that commit roughly zero percent of the murders in this country.

So just to be clear, you read the Constitution and find where it says we need to justify needing our Constitutional rights protected. I don't see that qualification, can you show me where it says that?

Does that work with free speech? Religion? Due process? You think they start with a judicial hearing where you first prove you need them before you get them? You are actually this stupid, aren't you?

A little more than zero percent.

Results suggest assault weapons (primarily assault-type rifles) account for 2-12% of guns used in crime in general (most estimates suggest less than 7%) and 13-16% of guns used in murders of police. Assault weapons and other high-capacity semiautomatics together generally account for 22 to 36% of crime guns, with some estimates upwards of 40% for cases involving serious violence including murders of police. Assault weapons and other high-capacity semiautomatics appear to be used in a higher share of firearm mass murders (up to 57% in total)

Criminal Use of Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Semiautomatic Firearms: an Updated Examination of Local and National Sources - PubMed

Policies restricting semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines are intended to reduce gunshot victimizations by limiting the stock of semiautomatic firearms with large ammunition capacities and other military-style features conducive to criminal use. The federal...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

You know, if you Republicans really wanted to show your support for law enforcement, you would support a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

We support police to maintain our rights, not in lieu of them.

Even a leftist article trying to maximize the use of the term assault weapon and narrow the definition of crime to maximize the percent couldn't come up with a number higher than 7%.

And yet that's the focus of leftists.

Funny how a guy calling himself "Winston" wants to protect the power of government from the people

 

[Rigby5]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

And the ones that commit roughly zero percent of the murders in this country.

So just to be clear, you read the Constitution and find where it says we need to justify needing our Constitutional rights protected. I don't see that qualification, can you show me where it says that?

Does that work with free speech? Religion? Due process? You think they start with a judicial hearing where you first prove you need them before you get them? You are actually this stupid, aren't you?

A little more than zero percent.

Results suggest assault weapons (primarily assault-type rifles) account for 2-12% of guns used in crime in general (most estimates suggest less than 7%) and 13-16% of guns used in murders of police. Assault weapons and other high-capacity semiautomatics together generally account for 22 to 36% of crime guns, with some estimates upwards of 40% for cases involving serious violence including murders of police. Assault weapons and other high-capacity semiautomatics appear to be used in a higher share of firearm mass murders (up to 57% in total)

Criminal Use of Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Semiautomatic Firearms: an Updated Examination of Local and National Sources - PubMed

Policies restricting semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines are intended to reduce gunshot victimizations by limiting the stock of semiautomatic firearms with large ammunition capacities and other military-style features conducive to criminal use. The federal...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

You know, if you Republicans really wanted to show your support for law enforcement, you would support a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

I do not believe your numbers are accurate.
This is from the DOJ:
{...
Eighty-six percent of the time (in 1.1 million violent
crimes) the weapons were handguns.
...}

Guns Used in Crime

Handguns Used in More Than One Million Violent Crimes, The Use of Semi-Automatic Guns In Murders Is Increasing U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ADVANCE FOR RELEASE AT 5 P.M. EDT BJS SUNDAY, JULY 9, 1995 202-307-0784 HANDGUNS USED IN MORE THAN ONE MILLION VIOLENT CRIMES THE USE OF SEMI-AUTOMATIC GUNS...

bjs.ojp.gov

Shotguns are #2, rifles are the lowest, and assault rifles are less then 1%, although increasing.

Police do NOT at all support any assault weapons ban.
That is because laws like assault weapons bans do not reduce the number of them in the hands of the criminals at all, but instead only decrease the number of weapons in the hands of honest people.
So assault weapons bans always increase crime and force police to work harder to defend the honest population the misguided law disarmed.

Anyone who understands and believes in a democratic republic, can't be for any gun control.

 

[White 6]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

You aren't going to kill 20 people in 10 second with a semi-automatic weapon, and we already prohibit full auto weapons in this country for civilian use. Got any other good exaggerations to impress the people that know nothing about weapons?

Did you know you can kill 20 people in 10 seconds with a car? Didn't know that, did ja

Does not surprise me. You are wanting to ban cars? Doubt you will win this one, any more than the nut-balls that would ban guns.

So you don't want to ban guns, which is good for a leftist.

But you think government can decide what our rights are, which isn't so good. You realize the second protects us specifically FROM government, right? That's the purpose of the 2nd, so say they can't restrict our rights. That it's a protection from government and government gets to decide what they means is absurd.

The right shall NOT BE INFRINGED. By ... government ... Seems clear. It's extremist to think it means what it says?

Ban guns? I keep enough to break up any assault on my place and make somebodies pay dearly for any attempt, and all are loaded, all the time. You would not know a leftist if your life depended on it.
What did you think of George W. Bush and his post Katrina gun confiscation in Louisiana? You can worry about leftist gun grabbers, trying to pass laws that ultimately will not pass constitutional muster all you want. I am keeping my eye on the right wing control people, as they are the only ones that have pulled it off, even on a limited area. Still, they pulled it off. All they had to do was declare an emergency and institute martial law over the citizenry. Those citizens, white, black, rich or poor never got their weapons back, not the ones in the ghettos, nor the ones in the gated communities. They were confiscated by local and state law enforcement, backed up by federalized National Guard. This is what you had better be worried about, no me.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

SSDD

what does a Flash RAM array configured to behave like a hard disk drive have to do with any of this?

 

[occupied]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

If some weapon had no legitimate purpose, then why would anyone make or sell them?
Rifles like an AR-15 are some of the least powerful and least deadly rifles made.
The tiny .223 bullet was adopted by the military because they decided it made winning easier if they stopped killing people.
The bullet the AR-15 shoots is designed to not be able to kill, but to wound instead.
They are so weak that most states do not allow AR-15s to be used to hunt deer, as they are not lethal enough and cause a slow death.

But really, in a country founded by violent armed rebellion, and with all governments only lasting about 300 years before they become corrupt and need to be destroyed, anyone who does not have combat ready weapons in a democratic republic, is extremely irresponsible, to the point of being a traitor.

I know quite a bit about guns, I own some, I just think the usual arguments the right trots out are stupid and meant to shirk all the responsibility of responsible gun ownership.

 

[kaz]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

You aren't going to kill 20 people in 10 second with a semi-automatic weapon, and we already prohibit full auto weapons in this country for civilian use. Got any other good exaggerations to impress the people that know nothing about weapons?

Did you know you can kill 20 people in 10 seconds with a car? Didn't know that, did ja

Does not surprise me. You are wanting to ban cars? Doubt you will win this one, any more than the nut-balls that would ban guns.

So you don't want to ban guns, which is good for a leftist.

But you think government can decide what our rights are, which isn't so good. You realize the second protects us specifically FROM government, right? That's the purpose of the 2nd, so say they can't restrict our rights. That it's a protection from government and government gets to decide what they means is absurd.

The right shall NOT BE INFRINGED. By ... government ... Seems clear. It's extremist to think it means what it says?

Ban guns? I keep enough to break up any assault on my place and make somebodies pay dearly for any attempt, and all are loaded, all the time. You would not know a leftist if your life depended on it.
What did you think of George W. Bush and his post Katrina gun confiscation in Louisiana? You can worry about leftist gun grabbers, trying to pass laws that ultimately will not pass constitutional muster all you want. I am keeping my eye on the right wing control people, as they are the only ones that have pulled it off, even on a limited area. Still, they pulled it off. All they had to do was declare an emergency and institute martial law over the citizenry. Those citizens, white, black, rich or poor never got their weapons back, not the ones in the ghettos, nor the ones in the gated communities. They were confiscated by local and state law enforcement, backed up by federalized National Guard. This is what you had better be worried about, no me.

You said Democrats were one extreme and you weren't with them or me.

So what infringement of gun rights do you support?

 

[kaz]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

If some weapon had no legitimate purpose, then why would anyone make or sell them?
Rifles like an AR-15 are some of the least powerful and least deadly rifles made.
The tiny .223 bullet was adopted by the military because they decided it made winning easier if they stopped killing people.
The bullet the AR-15 shoots is designed to not be able to kill, but to wound instead.
They are so weak that most states do not allow AR-15s to be used to hunt deer, as they are not lethal enough and cause a slow death.

But really, in a country founded by violent armed rebellion, and with all governments only lasting about 300 years before they become corrupt and need to be destroyed, anyone who does not have combat ready weapons in a democratic republic, is extremely irresponsible, to the point of being a traitor.

I know quite a bit about guns, I own some, I just think the usual arguments the right trots out are stupid and meant to shirk all the responsibility of responsible gun ownership.

So you think that conservatives arguments on guns are the ones that are weak in a discussion supporting leftists who want to ban guns that commit a tiny fraction of murders as if that's the problem.

And yet you don't wonder why most murders happen in cities which virtually ban gun ownership and have no complaint over the thousands of blacks being killed by guns that apparently don't exist because they are in those locations where guns are banned.

Thanks for bringing that moderation and balance to the discussion!

 

[occupied]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

If some weapon had no legitimate purpose, then why would anyone make or sell them?
Rifles like an AR-15 are some of the least powerful and least deadly rifles made.
The tiny .223 bullet was adopted by the military because they decided it made winning easier if they stopped killing people.
The bullet the AR-15 shoots is designed to not be able to kill, but to wound instead.
They are so weak that most states do not allow AR-15s to be used to hunt deer, as they are not lethal enough and cause a slow death.

But really, in a country founded by violent armed rebellion, and with all governments only lasting about 300 years before they become corrupt and need to be destroyed, anyone who does not have combat ready weapons in a democratic republic, is extremely irresponsible, to the point of being a traitor.

I know quite a bit about guns, I own some, I just think the usual arguments the right trots out are stupid and meant to shirk all the responsibility of responsible gun ownership.

So you think that conservatives arguments on guns are the ones that are weak in a discussion supporting leftists who want to ban guns that commit a tiny fraction of murders as if that's the problem.

And yet you don't wonder why most murders happen in cities which virtually ban gun ownership and have no complaint over the thousands of blacks being killed by guns that apparently don't exist because they are in those locations where guns are banned.

Thanks for bringing that moderation and balance to the discussion!

Just say they are cool and fun to shoot. That way you don't sound like a racist loony. I know the argument lacks the punch of "protecting us from tyranny" but it's at least rational.

 

[Rigby5]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

And the ones that commit roughly zero percent of the murders in this country.

So just to be clear, you read the Constitution and find where it says we need to justify needing our Constitutional rights protected. I don't see that qualification, can you show me where it says that?

Does that work with free speech? Religion? Due process? You think they start with a judicial hearing where you first prove you need them before you get them? You are actually this stupid, aren't you?

Your justifications are all wild flights of fancy. Just say they are cool and you like to shoot them. Anyone can understand that reasoning. I'm not against having them, I just think the right's arguments of civil wars, fighting tyranny or zombie like invasions of city dwellers in the suburbs are ludicrous.

I think you are wrong.

First of all, emergencies where efficient defensive weapons are necessary have already happened.
For example, the LA riots where Korean grocers had to defend their stores, and things like Katrina, where the police left town.

Second is that historically no government has ever prevented a natural trend towards corruption, that has required armed rebellion.
The fact the average government life span is about 300 years and more than a life time, does not mean we should then not still remain constantly prepared. It WILL happen, always has happened, and always will happen eventually.

And this is NOT an argument by the right.
It is the left that should have rebelled over right wing corruption, like the 3 million murdered by the illegal war in Vietnam, the millions imprisoned by the illegal war on drugs, the half million innocent Iraqis murdered by the WMD lies, etc. The US has the largest % imprisoned in the world, and is one of the worst dictatorships. We don't even have public health care or a reasonable minimum wage. That pretty much defines the US as slavery. Can anyone honestly try to claim a choice between Hillary and Trump is a democracy?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This man gets it.
I don't understand why other Republicans don't.

View attachment 508750

Here's the only assault weapon I own:

All the rest are sporting or home defense weapons:

Here's the only assault weapon I own:

This is the only one I own.

View attachment 508756

I have a pair of those!

 

[Papageorgio]

This man gets it.
I don't understand why other Republicans don't.

View attachment 508750

Only because he agrees with you. Funny how that works.