Assualt Weapons What are they good for?

[davemata]

This is a BAD argument for any of us to be making right now.

No. It was clarifying what it meant for someone who should know better. I made no arguments. I did make the statement that you should not allow your own kind to work hard at making the antis job easier, and that you should not apologize for what the 2a is for, just like no one apologizes for what the 1a is for.

I'm not going to agree with your rosey picture that the non-absolutists can be reasoned with, they're too far steeped in misinformation that correcting them becomes a herculean feat, because no matter how correct you are, and how nicely you gussy up the terms.

They still think stupidly. You can't fix stupid. They'll still ask, why do you need a semi-auto? They don't get it when you respond with, "Why do you need to control what I own?" "Why do you feel the need to project your fears on me?" "Why do you need to worry about these issues when they are so statistically rare that it's irrelevant?" "Why do you focus on the dead white kids in CT, but ignore the dead black kids in Chicago?" "Why do you think the same government that did so well with the War on Drugs and War on Terrorism can get Gun Control right?" "Why do you want to be disarmed?"

It goes on, but they keep coming back to stupid reasons, because it's not a logical or intelligent argument, it's a dumb argument for stupidity's sake. You can't fight stupid, you can't fight stupid emotion.

As for votes? I'd say at this point, we do. Between the schmucks in one party, and the POS's in the other, there are enough gentry knowing that losing the gun industry would be an economic blow, and that their base will not be kind to them over disarmament.

Hunting/target shooting is a losing approach, and you know it. Your average neutered urbanite will respond with gems like, "Why don't you just buy your meat at the market?" Self defense will be met with other such intelligence such as, "You can call the police."

Pandering and coddling the urbanites will not aid anyone in this case.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I'm not going to pretend that moderation is good when defending liberties.. that is how we have lost so much over the last century. I agree with Dave.. this is coming down to a fight and we can't reason with tyrants and leftist power freaks

Mister Bill will likely pop a cold one and sit back and mock patriots as they bleed and die to restore the Republic

 

[davemata]

I don't think it will be a fight, at least not one where our actions or words matter.

There will be two things that matter in this fight.
Greenbacks and votes. Be stingy with both, and make anyone who you give them to earn them. Make sure they also know at all times that both can immediately dry up.

 

[FourTeeFive]

1992 L.A. Riots Or How Californians Learned, Then Forgot, To Embrace The Gun

 

[cueball1214]

Wikipedia's Definition of a Assault Rifle.

Definition

The term assault rifle is a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally "storm rifle", as in "to storm a position"). The name was coined by Adolf Hitler[3] as a new name for the Maschinenpistole 43,[nb 1] subsequently known as the Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally considered the first assault rifle that served to popularise the concept and form the basis for today's modern assault rifles.
The translation assault rifle gradually became the common term for similar firearms sharing the same technical definition as the StG 44. In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[4][5][6]
It must be an individual weapon with provision to fire from the shoulder (i.e. a buttstock);
It must be capable of selective fire;
It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle;
Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable magazine rather than a feed-belt.
And it should at least have a firing range of 300 meters (1000 feet)
Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are technically not assault rifles despite frequently being considered as such. For example, semi-automatic-only rifles like the AR-15 (which the M16 rifle is based on) that share designs with assault rifles are not assault rifles, as they are not capable of switching to automatic fire and thus are not selective fire capable. Belt-fed weapons or rifles with fixed magazines are likewise not assault rifles because they do not have detachable box magazines.
The term "assault rifle" is often more loosely used for commercial or political reasons to include other types of arms, particularly arms that fall under a strict definition of the battle rifle, or semi-automatic variant of military rifles such as AR-15s.
The US Army defines assault rifles as "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachinegun and rifle cartridges

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I don't think it will be a fight, at least not one where our actions or words matter.

There will be two things that matter in this fight.
Greenbacks and votes. Be stingy with both, and make anyone who you give them to earn them. Make sure they also know at all times that both can immediately dry up.

I believe they will go too far too fast (not for the first time) and it will indeed come down to a fight. George Washington saw this and so have I

 

[SCAR Joe]

Um, the post directly above yours?



I really hope you aren't going to be foolish enough to make that argument to anyone outside a gun forum right now. Because it will hurt us, not help.

We're going to have a Hell of a time defending what we already have. Arguing an explicit right to revolution and the right to have hand-grenades and full auto weapons isn't going to find much support in the U.S. this week or next. It was considered a fringe position in anything other than a philosophical debate even before the CT shooting.

Self-defense is an absolutely solid position. The fact that craploads of AR-style platforms have been sold as hunting and target guns is as solid. The fact that none of the proposed bans would have affected these shootings is a solid position.

"You shouldn't ban semi-auto rifles because I should be able to buy grenades at Walmart" is so self-defeating I wonder if you're serious or you're a Brady shill.

Of course Im not! I realize that. This is a gun forum and one should be able to speak openly. I spent 5 years in the ARMY. Anyone who thinks it would take something out of the ordinary to get US troops to fire on US citizens doesnt get it! Black Jack Pershing called out US troops to fire on military veterans who were marching on the Capital after WW1 because they hadnt received the benefits they were promised! The point the 2nd is clear! The communist democrats have an agenda to disarm the public because they realize the guns empower people. Usually for the good, sometimes for the bad, but empower they do. The less empowerment we have the more control the gvt has. Its pretty simple to me. We have ten documented years of evidence (from the previous AW bad) that banning battlefield rifles does NOTHING to prevent or lower crime. Everybody knows it. The communist dems dont care about kids! Theyre using this shooting as an excuse and we all know it. Frankly its dispicable to me the way they are sensationalizing this.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Those old fringie Founders..

 

[40calruler]

Ok, I think this thread has a lot of good points and some really poor jabs at people because they do not agree with you. That is what people want. "Gun nuts" to take jabs, call names, seem uneducated, and give them all the "ammo" they need to say "look at who you are allowing to run around with an assault rifle". The simple truth is if you do not have an educated realistic reason then you are probably not going to help the cause of keeping them legal. If your answer is "come take it and all you will get is the bullets" then guess what..It will be taken. If you show a legit concern and need for such a weapon then you discredit those who say they have no use in our society. Look to my post of what it is used for on the family farm. I cannot use another weopon as fast and accurate to protect my livestock from coyotes or other such preditors.

Furthermore I have my guns either in my hand, in a holster on my hip, or in a biometric gun safe that has a battery back up. It costs a little but if you can argue you need a 2k rifle nobody wants to hear you cannot spend 1k on a safe. I put my finger or my wifes only on a piece of glass. Hit a button and the door is spring activated and flies open. Nobody else can get in unless they have mine or my wifes finger print. There goes the idea of stealing my weapons. I have a smaller one with the same operation nest to my bed for two pistols. could hols more but leaving it near empty allows no question of what I am grabbing in the dark. Gun control would be a none issue if those of use "Sane" people controled our own guns to the point that no neighbor, realative, or anyone without a group hack saw or a torch could get my guns and if they do get them they are going to have to take the safe with them. Which is bolted to the floor froom the inside. However with the bio safe I can access any rifle I need in a quarter the time the average person can enter a 4 digit code n any given older eletric safe.

Just a thought to keep our guns but also keep them in the hands of the "sane" person who passed the background.

 

[deen_ad]

\ We have ten documented years of evidence (from the previous AW bad) that banning battlefield rifles does NOTHING to prevent or lower crime. Everybody knows it.

The congressionally-mandated study of the federal "assault weapon" law found that: "At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders." (Urban Institute, "Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994," March 13, 1997, p. 3.)

 

[DonNova77]

Me, I would never buy an assault weapon. Going full-auto is a waist of money. I think i saw one once at the pit an it sounds like a waist, and dangerous. My problem is that they are calling my CMMG AR15 single fire Civilian rifle an "ASSAULT RIFLE". It has assaulted no one. "I" maybe insult them at the range with it. But that's a different thing. #Joking#
BUT TO EACH THERE OWN just make sure you follow the Safety rules by the book when operating one of those systems.

 

[40calruler]

Thats the whole idea in my opinion. If you follow safety precautions in all areas of your weapon, shooting, storage, cleaning. You will not have an "assault weapon". You will have a firearm that you use for recreation, competition, or just HD and nobody will have access but you.

 

[tripleshotsplease]

I use my assault weapon as a tool, i let my girl dry hump it while I jerk it.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Some people are a waste of oxygen

 

[458Socom]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjM9fcEzSJ0

An AR-15 is not an assualt weapon, see the above post it might clear some things up for the OP

 

[40calruler]

It makes it easy when you get invlolved in the forums to pick out people that you would never sell a weapon to when listing one here. I have remembered a few names that are on the no respond to list when I have a pistol or rifle for sale. They can go ahead and go buy them at the dealer...I take that back. They more than likely cannot buy one with a background check.

 

[Oregonhunter5]

I love and possibly own some.
Buy, it's a guarantee all guns that have magazines that except more than 10 rounds, will be regulated or banned within 6 months or less.
It's a given.
Do I want his, heck no.
But the world has changed for the Worse folks. Know one gets why guns a are great.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I don't think it's a given. Much can happen in 6 months

 

[ron]

I use the AR-15 for competition shooting. NRA High Power Rifle competition matches are held all across the United States. It is one of the most popular shooting
sports in America. I started shooting High Power with the M-1 garand but today the 'Mouse Gun' (AR-15) rules High Power 'Service Rifle' class. The national matches
at Camp Perry have been held for over 100 years. AR rifles dominate the competition. The standard national match course is 200-300-600 yards with iron sights.

I like to 'correct' people when they call the AR-15 an 'Assault Rifle' and to inform them it is a competition target rifle.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I believe the weapon (AR15) supposedly used by these last two shooters were specifically chosen (by those actually behind all this) because they are as American as mom and apple pie, and therefore the hardest targets to ban. Malign them, guilt by association, make them "scary" and it's easier to ban them

Too many markers of malignant design. Another is the instant suicide of all of them when they are confronted or have completed their mission. Dead men tell no tales