Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Actually, I feel the Swiss have nailed it...Look at Israeli gun laws. That's what we should do.
Actually, I feel the Swiss have nailed it...
So, no one is going to take on the impossible task of explaining the difference between this politically correct name "Assault Rifle" and a "Varmint Rifle"...
Seymour Flops, I sincerely hope you get a legitimate answer...
www.timesofisrael.com
If you don't know, that's the reason you haven't been hunting in years...I haven't been hunting in years. Where's the sport in hunting with an assault rifle?
No, I've never hunted. I live in a small town, so I have no real need for an assault rifle. Too much risk of killing a neighbor trying to stop a burglar. I have a shotgun, and some pistols for home defense, a lever action that is a keepsake from my granddad, and a .22 rifle for critters.What do you use your assault rifle for? Do you hunt with it?
Comparing America to Israel on gun laws is dishonest – and revealing
US conservatives like to point out that both societies are well-armed, but the similarity ends there: Israelis trust their state, and don't fear each other
Do they hunt with assault rifles in Texas? Must be some macho man thing.If you don't know, that's the reason you haven't been hunting in years...
www.timesofisrael.com
You know if semi-automatic weapons existed in the 1700’s and there was an insane amount of guns on the market at the time and in the possession of millions of people, the 2nd amendment would be written very differently. There would be a lot more restrictions. Instead the amendment was incredibly vague because all that existed at the time were muskets that took a large chunk of time to reload after firing a single shot.
Please note that I did not suggest guns would have been outlawed or banned. I’m not even suggesting that they should be now so don’t go full retard and claim that was the intent of my post.
My post does not at all fit my premise. My post says that if the founders knew what we did now, they would make the 2nd amendment much more specific and with sensible restrictions because they were not morons like republicans are now. You’re welcome for explaining this to you.
You know if semi-automatic weapons existed in the 1700’s and there was an insane amount of guns on the market at the time and in the possession of millions of people, the 2nd amendment would be written very differently. There would be a lot more restrictions. Instead the amendment was incredibly vague because all that existed at the time were muskets that took a large chunk of time to reload after firing a single shot.
Please note that I did not suggest guns would have been outlawed or banned. I’m not even suggesting that they should be now so don’t go full retard and claim that was the intent of my post.
What do you use your assault rifle for? Do you hunt with it?
Comparing America to Israel on gun laws is dishonest – and revealing
US conservatives like to point out that both societies are well-armed, but the similarity ends there: Israelis trust their state, and don't fear each other
That’s an incredibly dubious claim. Easily kill a dozen people? Such bullshit. That weapon was only good for very short range and was incredibly inaccurate at longer ranges.No, there were hand weapons of mass destruction even in revolutionary days
An assault weapons is a light, short range, but high fire power, for an attack.
The assault weapon of the 1700s was the blunderbuss, also known as a coach gun.
Since is was small and light, you could carry on in each hand, and the flared barrel ensured the widest possible dispersement of the 50 pellets it was loaded with. That could easily kill a dozen people with each shot.
The assault weapon of the Civil War was a pair of revolvers.
That was 12 quick shots before needing to reload
The assault weapon of WWI was the sawed off Trench Gun, pump shotgun.
The assault weapon of WWII was the M-1 carbine.
Actually, I feel the Swiss have nailed it...
So, no one is going to take on the impossible task of explaining the difference between this politically correct name "Assault Rifle" and a "Varmint Rifle"...
Seymour Flops, I sincerely hope you get a legitimate answer...
That’s an incredibly dubious claim. Easily kill a dozen people? Such bullshit. That weapon was only good for very short range and was incredibly inaccurate at longer ranges.
Either way, you’re still taking about a weapon few would have owned. Not everyone within those colonies even had guns. It’s so ridiculous to compare gun violence then to now. Quit trying.
The so called sensible restrictions that only affect law abiding citizens. By the way you should look up the puckle gun it was the first firearm described as a machine gun invented in 1720. The founding fathers where not morons they knew technology would advance and the whole reason for the 2nd is to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical government.My post does not at all fit my premise. My post says that if the founders knew what we did now, they would make the 2nd amendment much more specific and with sensible restrictions because they were not morons like republicans are now. You’re welcome for explaining this to you.
Yep I just did. Let me finish the Wikipedia quote you cherry-picked:The so called sensible restrictions that only affect law abiding citizens. By the way you should look up the puckle gun it was the first firearm described as a machine gun invented in 1720. The founding fathers where not morons they knew technology would advance and the whole reason for the 2nd is to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical government.
It's still an improvement on single shot muzzle loading flintlocks. To say that the 2nd Amendment was only written for flintlocks is blatant ignorance the same as saying the 1st only applies to quill and ink.Yep I just did. Let me finish the Wikipedia quote you cherry-picked:
“It was one of the earliest weapons to be referred to as a "machine gun", being called such in a 1722 shipping manifest, though its operation does not match the modern use of the term. It was never used during any combat operation or war. Production was highly limited and may have been as few as two guns.”
Yes they do and yes, it is, and you're talking to the right guy, MAGA Macho Man!Do they hunt with assault rifles in Texas? Must be some macho man thing.
Comparing America to Israel on gun laws is dishonest – and revealing
US conservatives like to point out that both societies are well-armed, but the similarity ends there: Israelis trust their state, and don't fear each other
There were rapid fire weapons in the 1700s. The Founders who wrote the Second Amendment would have had no problem realizing that semi-automatic firearms would soon be available to civilians. Similar to today when it seems obvious that in a couple of decades most people will be driving electric vehicles.You know if semi-automatic weapons existed in the 1700’s and there was an insane amount of guns on the market at the time and in the possession of millions of people, the 2nd amendment would be written very differently. There would be a lot more restrictions. Instead the amendment was incredibly vague because all that existed at the time were muskets that took a large chunk of time to reload after firing a single shot.
Please note that I did not suggest guns would have been outlawed or banned. I’m not even suggesting that they should be now so don’t go full retard and claim that was the intent of my post.
arizonadailyindependent.com
billypenn.com
Only morons, who can't shoot hunt with an AR-15.No kidding, but you failed miserably.
One can hunt deer with an AR15, or target practice with it.
There are millions in circulation. They are not used for killing people.
So, you are clearly incorrect.
I do appreciate you giving your definition. You are now literally more qualified to be the head of ATF than Biden's last two nominees.
So, when I hear a politician wanting to ban assault weapons, they mean all weapons intended for self-defense against human attackers? That's actually what I always thought they meant.
Good job, seriously.
