Why can Democrat politicians and hearing witnesses not define "assault weapon?"

[Votto]

Banning something you call "assault weapons," is one of your key talking points, yet whenever any politician or politial appointee is asked for the official definition of assault weapon, he or she can't do it.

Because your politicials cannot define them, there is no official definition. Give your own, if you like, but that isn't my question. You may be able to answer, but you don't have to worry about whatever policial ramifications your leaders seem to think would come with just define a term that they use so often.

So my question is why don't your leaders answer?

Democrats refuse to define what an assault weapon is because they want to make it up as they go

It's the same reason they refuse to define what a woman is as well.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Why can Democrat politicians and hearing witnesses not define "assault weapon?"​

Simple:
They know nothing about firearms.
They just want to ban as many of them as they can.
To achieve this, hey will prey on the emotions of the ignorant as often as necessary.

We see it every day.

 

[Seymour Flops]

They used the weapons available to them. Now any teenage wacko can have real purpose built mass murder weapons and they don't even have to be a good shot. Gun nutters like to talk responsibility but they will never take responsibility for the loose gun laws they want and their politicians pass.

Is every firearm a real purpose built mass murder weapon? If not how specifically do you say this one is but this one is not?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Is every firearm a real purpose built mass murder weapon? If not how specifically do you say this one is but this one is not?

Go easy on him - he's a victim of leftist exploitation.

 

[occupied]

Is every firearm a real purpose built mass murder weapon? If not how specifically do you say this one is but this one is not?

It's a conversation that needs to be had but the gun nutters refuse to even participate. Generally assault weapons are designed for combat rather than hunting or personal protection. I'm not even for trying to ban these things. I just want the right to take a greater responsibility for keeping these things away from crazy people. We are living and dying in the gun filled country they wanted but their gun politics are primarily concerned with never feeling or being responsible for how it turned out.

 

[LibertyKid]

Turns out it was a pistol caliber carbine......

Saw picture of a S&W Shield EZ 2.0.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

If you wanted to kill a whole bunch of people and perhaps shoot it out with the cops what would you choose? Your old hunting rifle? A shotgun? A pistol or two? No you would choose the combat style weapons specifically designed to kill people. Owning what is mostly a useless range toy should at least carry an extra measure of responsibility.

What is a combat style weapon?

 

[LibertyKid]

It's a conversation that needs to be had but the gun nutters refuse to even participate. Generally assault weapons are designed for combat rather than hunting or personal protection. I'm not even for trying to ban these things. I just want the right to take a greater responsibility for keeping these things away from crazy people. We are living and dying in the gun filled country they wanted but their gun politics are primarily concerned with never feeling or being responsible for how it turned out.

I don't disagree. However, the mentally unstable or ill person is hard to stop if no one is paying attention to signs, staying involved in their life. Just read an article on the female shooter in Nashville. Her parents were religious and didn't accept her male identity. And her Manifesto is pretty fucked up too and how she is equating her wanting to be trans with misogyny. My gut tells me her parents were out of touch and wanted to pretend that nothing was wrong.

One thing I think we could try is to remove illegal guns off the street since the vast majority of "Mass shootings" are done by criminals and gang-bangers, is a mass gun by back operation. Give these illegal gun "owners" the chance to take their gun to a facility and obtain a voucher they can redeem for payment, risk free. It probably needs to be a lot of money per the type of firearm to entice them to give up their guns. It won't eliminate all of them, but it could be an option. I'm sure the logistics would require a lot of conversation. But I think that is a logical step we could take.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It's a conversation that needs to be had but the gun nutters refuse to even participate. Generally assault weapons are designed for combat rather than hunting or personal protection. I'm not even for trying to ban these things. I just want the right to take a greater responsibility for keeping these things away from crazy people. We are living and dying in the gun filled country they wanted but their gun politics are primarily concerned with never feeling or being responsible for how it turned out.

Go to your local gun store and try to buy an assault weapon. The dealer will likely laugh at your ignorance.

 

[occupied]

I don't disagree. However, the mentally unstable or ill person is hard to stop if no one is paying attention to signs, staying involved in their life. Just read an article on the female shooter in Nashville. Her parents were religious and didn't accept her male identity. And her Manifesto is pretty fucked up too and how she is equating her wanting to be trans with misogyny. My gut tells me her parents were out of touch and wanted to pretend that nothing was wrong.

One thing I think we could try is to remove illegal guns off the street since the vast majority of "Mass shootings" are done by criminals and gang-bangers, is a mass gun by back operation. Give these illegal gun "owners" the chance to take their gun to a facility and obtain a voucher they can redeem for payment, risk free. It probably needs to be a lot of money per the type of firearm to entice them to give up their guns. It won't eliminate all of them, but it could be an option. I'm sure the logistics would require a lot of conversation. But I think that is a logical step we could take.

It's a complex issue. Crime guns are almost a separate issue except where they intersect the legal market. People who sell guns are far too eager to make a sale to worry about the first time buyer standing in their shop. Somewhere right there at the point of sale there needs to be something or someone asking if this person really needs a gun.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It's a complex issue. Crime guns are almost a separate issue except where they intersect the legal market. People who sell guns are far too eager to make a sale to worry about the first time buyer standing in their shop. Somewhere right there at the point of sale there needs to be something or someone asking if this person really needs a gun.

What does need have to do with anything?

 

[occupied]

Go to your local gun store and try to buy an assault weapon. The dealer will likely laugh at your ignorance.

I have some guns. I don't talk about them online and I don't worship them like you do. They have no magical powers. I served in the military and know all I feel I need to know about guns. Your gun hobby/religion has a societal cost you will never willingly face.

 

[Seymour Flops]

It's a conversation that needs to be had but the gun nutters refuse to even participate.

I'm always ready to have that conversation

Generally assault weapons are designed for combat rather than hunting or personal protection.

I think that's a good start in getting to a reasonable definition. It would leave out the two models gun banners most commonly give which are the AR15 AND the civilian AK47.

Each of those were based on weapons designed for combat but were re-engineered so that they could NOT be used in combat.

My BIL has one that he uses to hunt wild hogs whiched are classed as vermin in Texas so there is no season and no limits. They are often used effectively for home defense. Even if a firearm is never used it gives peace of mind.

However, I have an Army surplus 1911 that was designed for combat.

I'm not even for trying to ban these things. I just want the right to take a greater responsibility for keeping these things away from crazy people. We are living and dying in the gun filled country they wanted but their gun politics are primarily concerned with never feeling or being responsible for how it turned out.

I don't want people with mental illness to get any firearm. The details will be hotly debated and highly politicized.

For example, if Audrey Hale was honest when the filled out their applications to purchase seven firearms, they checked nonbinary for their gender. Do you now wish that warning of mental instability had been heeded and they had been denied the right to purchase any firearm? Yes or no to that then anything else you wish had happened.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I have some guns. I don't talk about them online and I don't worship them like you do. They have no magical powers. I served in the military and know all I feel I need to know about guns. Your gun hobby/religion has a societal cost you will never willingly face.

I served in the military also. I do not worship guns but I do not have an irrational fear of them and want to eliminate them because they are scary looking! Why do you?

 

[marvin martian]

It's a conversation that needs to be had but the gun nutters refuse to even participate. Generally assault weapons are designed for combat rather than hunting or personal protection. I'm not even for trying to ban these things. I just want the right to take a greater responsibility for keeping these things away from crazy people. We are living and dying in the gun filled country they wanted but their gun politics are primarily concerned with never feeling or being responsible for how it turned out.

Your definition is at odds with many others. This should be easy for you. Why can't you do it?

 

[occupied]

I served in the military also. I do not worship guns but I do not have an irrational fear of them and want to eliminate them because they are scary looking! Why do you?

The big question here and always has been why you think even the most common sense gun legislation is somehow a total ban on guns. Any rebuttal is full of slippery slope conspiracy theories and based on the premise that simply having some guns is a magical defense against tyranny. No one with any common sense buys these baseless paranoid arguments. Just saying you like to shoot and they make you feel safe doesn't carry enough punch does it?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Go to your local gun store and try to buy an assault weapon. The dealer will likely laugh at your ignorance.

According to C_Clayton_Jones , it is likely assault weapons do not exist in his state.

 

[2aguy]

It's a complex issue. Crime guns are almost a separate issue except where they intersect the legal market. People who sell guns are far too eager to make a sale to worry about the first time buyer standing in their shop. Somewhere right there at the point of sale there needs to be something or someone asking if this person really needs a gun.

You are an idiot........gun stores are highly, highly regulated by the federal government and have to routinely justify their existence to inspections from top to bottom, you doofus......the last thing they want to do is sell a gun to a sketchy individual.

You know so little about so much, yet you proclaim it with such certitude.....you are an idiot.

 

[2aguy]

The big question here and always has been why you think even the most common sense gun legislation is somehow a total ban on guns. Any rebuttal is full of slippery slope conspiracy theories and based on the premise that simply having some guns is a magical defense against tyranny. No one with any common sense buys these baseless paranoid arguments. Just saying you like to shoot and they make you feel safe doesn't carry enough punch does it?

No...you guys have started refusing to name the gun control you want because each time you do, we actually respond with facts, truth and reality, and show that what you want is either intentionally deceptive in that it does nothing against actual criminals, but is a direct attack on normal gun owners...or you are naive and dumb.....and don't realize that the gun control you want does nothing against actual criminals and simply is a direct attack on normal gun owners....

Now......be brave...

List your gun control laws you want so that we can explain why they are useless....pointless...and simply a way to attack normal gun owners and create more taxes, fees, red tape and legal peril for normal people, while allowing actual criminals to get all the guns they want...

Be brave.......post them.

 

[2aguy]

I'm always ready to have that conversation


I think that's a good start in getting to a reasonable definition. It would leave out the two models gun banners most commonly give which are the AR15 AND the civilian AK47.

Each of those were based on weapons designed for combat but were re-engineered so that they could NOT be used in combat.

My BIL has one that he uses to hunt wild hogs whiched are classed as vermin in Texas so there is no season and no limits. They are often used effectively for home defense. Even if a firearm is never used it gives peace of mind.

However, I have an Army surplus 1911 that was designed for combat.

I don't want people with mental illness to get any firearm. The details will be hotly debated and highly politicized.

For example, if Audrey Hale was honest when the filled out their applications to purchase seven firearms, they checked nonbinary for their gender. Do you now wish that warning of mental instability had been heeded and they had been denied the right to purchase any firearm? Yes or no to that then anything else you wish had happened.

Actually, the original Patent on. the AR-15 lists it as a civilian rifle.............it was not a military rifle

The FOIA request itself was prompted from a Nov. 2017 article in The Atlantic in which the magazine, unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with its anti-gun bent, attempted to bolster a claim that “these rifles were meant for the military, not civilians.”

“Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963. It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the ‘Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle’ began on Jan 2, 1964,” one critic of the article contended. “The M16 wasn’t issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn’t standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn’t officially replace the M14 until 1969.”

Original ATF AR-15 Classification Refutes Claim that Rifle ‘Not Meant’ for Civilians