HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why don't most people car...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:23 PM

Why don't most people care whether a gun is semi-automatic or automatic?


Because we don't really care how many times you need to pull the trigger. We care about the amount of damage a single gun can do in seconds without having to pause to reload. Both semi-automatics and automatics are killing machines. We don't care that an automatic might have even more killing capacity. Both should be heavily restricted.

When a gun such as the semi-automatic 223 used by the Sandy Hook shooter can fire a bullet that travels at the speed of 3200 feet PER SECOND into the body of a 6 year old -- and can continue to shoot 30 or more times before having to reload, there's only one name for it. EVIL.




172 replies, 9409 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 172 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why don't most people care whether a gun is semi-automatic or automatic? (Original post)
pnwmom Dec 2012 OP
NightWatcher Dec 2012 #1
gcomeau Dec 2012 #2
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #4
gcomeau Dec 2012 #8
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #13
Whovian Dec 2012 #101
99Forever Dec 2012 #25
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #28
pnwmom Dec 2012 #43
99Forever Dec 2012 #78
stevenleser Dec 2012 #83
laundry_queen Dec 2012 #99
spin Dec 2012 #157
stevenleser Dec 2012 #167
Recursion Dec 2012 #105
99Forever Dec 2012 #119
pnwmom Dec 2012 #42
former-republican Dec 2012 #49
intaglio Dec 2012 #129
robinlynne Dec 2012 #53
MrModerate Dec 2012 #75
RC Dec 2012 #144
roguevalley Dec 2012 #81
Jenoch Dec 2012 #103
Recursion Dec 2012 #108
intaglio Dec 2012 #127
Hoyt Dec 2012 #128
samsingh Dec 2012 #34
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #5
former-republican Dec 2012 #6
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #15
former-republican Dec 2012 #16
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #23
former-republican Dec 2012 #27
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #30
pediatricmedic Dec 2012 #68
riverbendviewgal Dec 2012 #66
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #69
riverbendviewgal Dec 2012 #74
Mec9000 Dec 2012 #9
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #11
Mec9000 Dec 2012 #14
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #19
Mec9000 Dec 2012 #26
former-republican Dec 2012 #29
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #35
former-republican Dec 2012 #45
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #48
former-republican Dec 2012 #56
former-republican Dec 2012 #58
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #61
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #32
intaglio Dec 2012 #131
billh58 Dec 2012 #148
intaglio Dec 2012 #156
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #18
intaglio Dec 2012 #130
geckosfeet Dec 2012 #12
NightWatcher Dec 2012 #20
bettyellen Dec 2012 #31
klook Dec 2012 #77
bettyellen Dec 2012 #85
klook Dec 2012 #86
Recursion Dec 2012 #111
pnwmom Dec 2012 #44
geckosfeet Dec 2012 #55
Jenoch Dec 2012 #110
DollarBillHines Dec 2012 #17
billh58 Dec 2012 #149
LineLineLineLineReply .
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #154
spin Dec 2012 #162
DollarBillHines Dec 2012 #170
pnwmom Dec 2012 #33
robinlynne Dec 2012 #52
BainsBane Dec 2012 #71
laundry_queen Dec 2012 #100
Recursion Dec 2012 #109
BainsBane Dec 2012 #115
BainsBane Dec 2012 #116
Recursion Dec 2012 #122
RC Dec 2012 #146
billh58 Dec 2012 #155
Recursion Dec 2012 #158
billh58 Dec 2012 #159
RC Dec 2012 #145
xtraxritical Dec 2012 #72
DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2012 #79
laundry_queen Dec 2012 #102
Recursion Dec 2012 #112
_Liann_ Dec 2012 #114
Jenoch Dec 2012 #136
SharonAnn Dec 2012 #121
Pholus Dec 2012 #153
jody Dec 2012 #3
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #7
NYC_SKP Dec 2012 #10
jody Dec 2012 #21
NYC_SKP Dec 2012 #24
jody Dec 2012 #38
pnwmom Dec 2012 #46
Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #47
jody Dec 2012 #54
jody Dec 2012 #88
pnwmom Dec 2012 #91
jody Dec 2012 #93
pnwmom Dec 2012 #96
jody Dec 2012 #97
pnwmom Dec 2012 #98
Iggo Dec 2012 #142
jody Dec 2012 #143
Iggo Dec 2012 #163
Recursion Dec 2012 #113
pnwmom Dec 2012 #117
Recursion Dec 2012 #120
bettyellen Dec 2012 #87
RC Dec 2012 #147
intaglio Dec 2012 #133
Jenoch Dec 2012 #138
intaglio Dec 2012 #141
pnwmom Dec 2012 #36
Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #22
pnwmom Dec 2012 #37
Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #40
pnwmom Dec 2012 #76
Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #80
eallen Dec 2012 #39
spanone Dec 2012 #41
stevenleser Dec 2012 #84
likesmountains 52 Dec 2012 #50
robinlynne Dec 2012 #51
cantbeserious Dec 2012 #57
janx Dec 2012 #60
cantbeserious Dec 2012 #62
janx Dec 2012 #65
OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #59
cantbeserious Dec 2012 #63
Recursion Dec 2012 #123
cantbeserious Dec 2012 #132
Recursion Dec 2012 #134
cantbeserious Dec 2012 #135
rhett o rick Dec 2012 #64
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #67
pansypoo53219 Dec 2012 #70
Recursion Dec 2012 #107
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #73
stevenleser Dec 2012 #82
jody Dec 2012 #89
stevenleser Dec 2012 #90
jody Dec 2012 #92
stevenleser Dec 2012 #94
jody Dec 2012 #95
bettyellen Dec 2012 #137
Recursion Dec 2012 #104
stevenleser Dec 2012 #118
Recursion Dec 2012 #106
treestar Dec 2012 #125
Jenoch Dec 2012 #139
stevenleser Dec 2012 #140
Recursion Dec 2012 #161
stevenleser Dec 2012 #168
Recursion Dec 2012 #169
RC Dec 2012 #150
Recursion Dec 2012 #164
RC Dec 2012 #165
Recursion Dec 2012 #166
billh58 Dec 2012 #171
treestar Dec 2012 #124
graham4anything Dec 2012 #126
RC Dec 2012 #151
graham4anything Dec 2012 #172
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #152
Deep13 Dec 2012 #160

Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:26 PM

1. there is a difference and to argue from a position of ignorance weakens any valid points you make

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:30 PM

2. The OP said the difference was *irrelevant*...

...not that there wasn't a difference. Pay attention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gcomeau (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:31 PM

4. The OP is ignorant and angry

A bad combination on the best of days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:42 PM

8. Says a poster...

...who responded without apparently even reading what the OP said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gcomeau (Reply #8)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:46 PM

13. I read the OP prior to posting and stand by my observations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:09 AM

101. Right, the fact you have a hard on for guns is established

 

from your precious/previous posts and now you seem to be going into hyperdrive to discount anyone who may disagree with you even when the facts are not congruent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:58 PM

25. When you are standing on the side of mass murderers of 6-7 year olds..

... don't whine about sane people being angry at you. You ask for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #25)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:03 PM

28. I have things I would like to see done to change things for the better.

They may or may not be viable, but at least they are points for discussion not angry ignorant screeds. This issue is not binary, not matter how some here try to frame it. Here are my current thoughts:

Things I support

NICS checks or equivalent on all transactions, even private party transaction and gifts. My approach would be a Federal FOID that you would automatically get at 18yo so they are not a "firearms ownership licenses", a common objection to that approach. The check is then if the FOID is still valid for the sale to proceed. This is easy from the IT perspective. Note the NRA rejects the FOID approach.

Limitation of pistol magazines to what fits inside the grip of the gun. Require that new designs not support magazines that extend beneath the handle (BATF already has authority to force design changes). This is readily demonstrated by the Ruger line of .22LR handguns and the Astra 400/600. Grandfather or buy back at retail price non-conforming magazines. This approach also slows down magazine changes. Note that the NRA has rejected magazine limitations

All firearms must be secured when not in use, being cleaned, transported, etc. While California got stupid on parts of this, its the right thing to do. Some will miss their old time glass front display cases or wall rack, but proper security is a must. Would consider an exemption for non-functional devices. I believe the NRA has fought mandatory safes.

Somethings I have mixed feelings about/no definitive solution

Mandatory owner training. It is not required to exercise any other enumerated right, but I have seen some very scary stuff over the years. Not sure what the standards should be, but I come down on the side of some training being required. The NRA has fought this.

Mandatory safety training for children. Enough for them to overcome their natural curiosity and get an adult should they find an unsecured firearm. While some would find that more offensive than the fundies find sex ed, until things change, its basic safety and needs to be done. Not sure the best way, but it is clearly called for. NRA has not taken a stand on this but does offer such classes. I still don't see it as a talking point.

Waiting periods. For someone who already has firearms, not sure what purpose they serve. For first time owners I support them. Overall I think they are a good idea. Not sure what the right time length should be. 1 weeks seems good. There are reports that Lanza tried to buy a rifle but was stopped by the mandated waiting period (if the media reports are to be believed). NRA opposes waiting periods

Better mental health reporting and supervision. Seen a number of posts on that here. Clearly something is called for, but how to do it is not clear. Loughner never should have been allowed to have a gun. The NRA has fought additional reporting of some types of problems.

===============================================
That's my current working list. Still thinking about long guns, and have some thoughts, but not enough to post yet. There are other issues as well but this is what I have worked up so far. Some are clearly more ready than others. Open for comment and discussion.
===============================================

Some background:
My focus is in most of this is protecting the ability of those who need it to have access to effective self defense, and today that means a semi automatic handgun. There was a time I was much more pro gun control, not surprising given my background. What changed my mind was when my late wife was part of the shelter movement after she retired. She started teaching women only classes without any sanction or insurance. It was and remains controversial in the shelter movement. Later I became deeply concerned about GLBTs being bashed and killed. T*s are getting killed in our cities and damn few seem to give a damn, including the police. I have skin in that game. These are not people going into bad areas and doing questionable things, these are just people living their lives under threat. Sometimes it even follows them home. That is why they arm themselves and they will gladly disarm when the threat goes away. That is why I support handguns for self defense. Its not for the rude toters, it is for those facing real threats of violence that the police cannot abate and sometimes do not ever care about. Those who would disarm those under threat need to consider how they would tell someone lying there bleeding and bashed, tortured or shot that somehow that is better than if they had the ability to defend themselves and used it. I for one think it is the liberal and progressive approach to help them, not leave them to the predators, YMMV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #28)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:27 PM

43. What did I say that was factually incorrect? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #43)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:33 PM

78. These guys think...

... they can filibuster keeping their *precious*.

They are wrong. The worm has turned. When is the only remaining question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #78)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 02:12 AM

83. I missed seeing your comment when I posted below, you are absolutely right. That is what it is

'filibuster'. Let's derail discussions on the finer distinctions of guns that most people in this country care nothing about. We care about how many people a gun can maim or kill in a short period of time. We dont care whether it is classified as semi-automatic, fully-automatic, an assault rifle, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #83)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:03 AM

99. That's exactly what it is

and it's getting tiring. No one is buying it anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #83)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:17 PM

157. I feel many on your side should be totally honest and simply say you wish to ban ...

and confiscate all firearms. Then we could have a simple discussion over the wisdom of disarming all American citizens.

The leadership of the gun control movement realizes that such a law will never pass at this time and hope to incrementally achieve their goal of banning all firearms by using an incremental approach. First you pass a law banning "black rifles" then you pass a law banning all semi-auto rifles and shotguns. You then ban all handguns and pistols.

Contact them and suggest they support banning all firearms. See how far you get.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #157)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:53 PM

167. I'm willing to consider the legality of a single shot rifle that is difficult to reload.

I'm willing to live with that in my desired endstate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #25)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:24 AM

105. Really? You're the one pushing to keep the weapon Lanza used legal

If you support an assault weapons ban, you're saying you want the rifle he used to stay legal.

Worse yet, you call it "deflection" or "distraction" or whatever when I try to point that out to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #105)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 09:16 AM

119. Hogwash.

Clearly you don't have the first clue as to what I want if that's your conclusion. That's problem with making onsense up about other people on the internet, we get to tell you you're full of shit when you do it, and you sir, ARE full of shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:26 PM

42. I admit to being angry. What did I say that was factually incorrect? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #42)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:43 PM

49. Actually nothing I would comment on , your post was your opinion

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #49)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:26 AM

129. So there was nothing factually incorrect

What is more it certainly appears that the OP is inline with majority opinion on this board.

What's your beef then - except you want to defend the indefensible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:47 PM

53. The OP is absolutely correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:30 PM

75. The OP is clearly in command of the facts . . .

And understandably frustrated that fools continue to pretend that there's any meaningful difference between "automatic" and "semiautomatic," when in practice there is none.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrModerate (Reply #75)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 02:12 PM

144. Especially with the addition of bump stocks or rubber bands, making them for all intents and purpose

 

fully automatic.

"Assault weapon" is ANY military knockoff. A civilian version of a military weapon. The Bushmaster is a current high profile example of this. It is the looks that attracts the less stable to this type of gun. These guns were especially designed to hunt and kill humans beings. The have no place outside military and law enforcement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 02:02 AM

81. I don't care if they are semi or automatic. Any gun that fires rounds like that

is a military gun and needs banning. The rest is semantics. Both types have been used in massacres.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #81)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:15 AM

103. A fully auto weapon has not been used

in any of the mass shootings in the U.S. I understand the current frustration, but that is a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #81)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:29 AM

108. No automatic weapon has been used in any mass shooting in the US

I think the last time one was used at all was in that California bank robbery, and only the robbers were killed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:21 AM

127. For a "Professor" you are ignorant of the word ignorant

The OP offers an opinion and you describe her as ignorant. Sorry, language doesn't work that way. Her opinion is based on what appears to be a majority view on this board (and probably the current majority view throughout the USA). This makes her opinion well informed.

He anger is open, unlike the insulting and passive aggressive pronouncements that you make, and is honest.

Open up your anger, tell us what you actually feel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:24 AM

128. A high percentage of gun toters/abusers are too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gcomeau (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:07 PM

34. i understood that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:36 PM

5. This s what is amazing

The bushmaster is found in combat zones around the world...you realized that, right? It's right up there with the AK these days.

I know, it is a happy thought

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:40 PM

6. Which countries military does Bushmaster have a contract with to export their AR 15 to?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:47 PM

15. Did I say army?

Pay attention, I said combat zone, not army.

It's best to pay attention. You think these are not part of the black market weapons trade around the world?

Reality is, they are...with all their deficiencies...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #15)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:49 PM

16. Please link where Bushmasters are being found all over combat zones

 

thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #16)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:55 PM

23. You can call CNN Christianne Ammanpour saw them in Bosnia

AR type weapons. The town hall meeting they had the other day where Piers Morgan had the usual fire breathers doing the same you are doing. She mentioned Kosovo specifically.

But here you go.

Black-market arms deals violate the laws or policies of one or more of the states where the transaction occurs--the source country, transit countries, or the recipient country. The magnitude of the illicit market is unknown, but it is assumed to be increasing, both because of the many on-going wars (creating demand) and the large supply of arms freed up with the end of the Cold War. Even the recent conclusion of several long-running conflicts--in Central America and Southern Africa--has contributed to the black market glut, as peace processes failed to adequately disarm warring parties, and these weapons are recycled to other wars or to bandits.

Covert gun-running by intelligence or other government agencies to insurgent groups has historically been a major source of illicit arms. Weapons supplied by the CIA to guerrillas in Afghanistan, Angola and Central America during the 1980s not only sustained brutal fighting then, but two of those wars continue today. In addition, some CIA-supplied arms--including Stinger surface-to-air missiles--are now presumed to be in the hands of drug-traffickers and terrorists.

The domestic U.S. gun market is another major source of illicit arms. There are an estimated 250 million firearms circulating in the United States, and over 245,000 federally-licensed firearms dealers. Some of the five or six million firearms purchased annually in the United States by private buyers are acquired by middlemen working on behalf of arms traffickers who smuggle them out of the country. --L.L.


http://www.fas.org/faspir/pir0797.htm

You are serious...there is plenty more on the web. It is a well known issue, mostly outside the United States.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #23)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:02 PM

27. Okay , what you meant to say was that some AR types have been found in other countries

 

Could be Colt , Armalite , Knights Armaments , Rock River Arms etc...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #27)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:04 PM

30. They are out there

There are many clones of the AK. And your point? Among them are bushmasters.

Clear enough for you? They are extremely deficient, so much so that you have army units and these bad guys trading shots with the same exact NATO ammo...hysterical, I know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #27)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:45 PM

68. Don't forget the foreign manufacturers like the Chinese Norinco and there CQ AR variant

They are flooding the foreign markets with AR variant clones. At half the cost of US made arms, it's a deal for many countries and criminals alike.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #23)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:41 PM

66. this sounds like LORD OF WAR

the movie. It scared me then and now it seems more scary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riverbendviewgal (Reply #66)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:03 PM

69. Led of War is based on one trader

Recently arrested.

This article from Rolling Stones gets to the meat of it with yet another group of these low life's.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-stoner-arms-dealers-20110316

Oh and here

News of arrest.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/07/thailand.russia

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #69)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:26 PM

74. read in mother jones.

Oath keepers act of treason..

There so many of them in America now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:43 PM

9. You have no idea what you are talking about..

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mec9000 (Reply #9)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:45 PM

11. Yeah I don't why they are in the weapons black market.

And have been found in places like Serbia, Mexico and even Africa.

But hey, if you want to live in that warm fuzzy fantasy, so be it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:47 PM

14. The ones in Mexico were given to them by the ATF the rest I suspect are M16 clones

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mec9000 (Reply #14)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:51 PM

19. They were? No son, they are bought all along the border

And the trade started well before the previous administration, let alone the current one. And it's not just Mexico. It goes all the way to the late 1990s at the very least.

In fact, fast and furious, badly designed and all, was an attempt to try to stop it. Oh and that is an infinitesimally small number of what has been taken around the world, not just Mexico, by the weapons traders.

It must be nice to live in a fantasy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #19)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:01 PM

26. around the world they want full auto not a semi auto... AKs much cheaper in the third world.

 

You are the one in a fantasy world if you think bushmasters are the weapon of choice..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mec9000 (Reply #26)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:04 PM

29. Of course they aren't

 

The only smuggled one would be semi auto and they would be expensive.

AK's are a dime a dozen in third world countries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #29)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:07 PM

35. Not as expensive as you think

What is hysterical is that I actually saw these kinds of weapons, for real as well...that is what is hysterical.

Once again, go read the full thing

http://www.fas.org/faspir/pir0797.htm

And that is just a starting point of what actually exists out there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #35)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:30 PM

45. They are being smuggled and also sold legally to Mexican authorities

 

The smuggled ones are semi auto and the legal ones can be select fire if requested by Mexico.

The market is for Mexico and the cartels for semi autos not around the world in combat zones.

A few years ago Mexico made a claim that over 100 illegal M16's were found and confiscated
by Mexican authorities , The weapons were found in a raid .

They being Mexico claimed they were smuggled in over the border.

The US government got involved and asked for the serial numbers of the weapons .
They were traced back to Colt manufacturing , the irony of the whole thing was these
weapons that were selective fire were sold by Colt to the Mexican government then resold by corrupt officials.

The AR15 semi auto is not high on the list for smuggled weapons if they are being bought specifically for combat zones
They would be expensive compared to a Russian , or Chinese AK47's
Also the parts needed if the AR15 breaks down is not readily available like an AK 47 variant in those parts of the world.


edit to add
I'm not saying you won't find any in third world combat zones but the numbers are very few

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #45)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:42 PM

48. Mexico issues FAL to line troops

A few Mliltary Police units are issued M-16,and the Paratroopers are mostly issued M-4 and Mexico is expected to replace the whole lot with an internally manufactured battle rifle by 2016 last time I checked.

Alas this is not just Mexico.

But if you think so,all the evidence in the world will not matter.

So with that have a wonderful life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #48)


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #48)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:10 PM

58. It's the FX-05

 

And it's being issued now and they are in a transition phase.

Everything I posted is correct and not based on opinion.
I deleted my snarky comment to you because I know you are passionate about this.
But you should also listen to people also who have spent time in real 3rd world nations
and I don't mean Mexico



Have a good night

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #58)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:21 PM

61. That the federal police uses M-16 and M-4 yes

They are like the FBI...one brigade was transferred to the police. A mistake, in my view in 2008.

That some Mexican army units use them, yes. That Marines use them, yes. But far from exclusively.

But whatever buddy' you got your dander in a bunch over the comment that our civilian market is the source to black market weapons around the world and that is a fact too jack

Have an excelent day.

If you purposely confuse military contracts with the gray and back markets, there is litte more to be said.

Have an excellent day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mec9000 (Reply #26)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:05 PM

32. Yup, must be nice to live in this fantasy.

Yup, hysterical.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

http://www.fas.org/faspir/pir0797.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mec9000 (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:29 AM

131. Evidence?

Evidence, Beuhler, Beuhler?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #131)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:37 PM

148. He's gone to the big

NRA gun show in the sky...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #148)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:06 PM

156. I still think the Stone Pizza should be put in the avatar frame

There's something so satisfying about that image

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:50 PM

18. We have no easy way to know if Bushmaster ever received a FMS contract

They are strictly regulated and documented, but without a FOIA request, its not normally made public. Most national governments would want selective or 3 round burst, not semiautomatic only rifles. The cost difference is negligible. Colt ARs clearly have been exported to any number of nations.

There is nothing to suggest that Bushmaster were as a brand illegally exported in significant volume either. A BATF audit could run that to ground fairly easily.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mec9000 (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:28 AM

130. Evidence, I'm sure the people who pointed you towards this discussion could provide some n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:46 PM

12. There is a whole lot of that going on these days.

I understand the anger, but good legislation is not written out of anger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #12)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:52 PM

20. at least Biden is working on it, and he wrote the previous AWB bill. It had a lot of good points

I especially liked the limits on magazines. After a few years into the ban it was more difficult to find the pre-ban high cap mags. This will not affect older hobbists, but will but a crimp in teh plans of younger spree shooters who run to Walmart, grab a gun, and use it on a school the next day. Also several aspects of the AWB that limited certain "tactical" applications like shorter, more concealable barrels, and some fore end grips will cut down on a shooter being able to conceal a weapon and walk it into the center of a school, church, or mall before whipping it out to cause death.

Biden knows his shit and will also get input from others who are knowledgeable on the subject and on any shortcomings the previous ban had...like say an end date.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #20)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:05 PM

31. That's not good enough! We should all be educated enough on gunnery to write legislation ourselves!!

Or else we MUST STFU.
so goes the line of thinking here, LOL. NRA IDIOCY.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #31)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:32 PM

77. You obviously don't know your Glock from a Colt in the ground. :) n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #77)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 02:59 AM

85. Yep, and I'm proud of it!

I trust people who are actually interested in sensible regulations to educate me rather than all the phonies here pretending to give a damn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #85)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:43 AM

86. Agreed

We do occasionally hear from reasonable gun owners and RKBA advocates. Not every one thinks you have to demonstrate technical weapons knowledge to have a voice in this discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #31)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:36 AM

111. Well, not STFU, but at least listen when those of us who do know guns...

...try to tell you that what you're pushing for doesn't do what you think it does.

Obviously you don't need knowledge to have an opinion, but it can often help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #20)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:29 PM

44. It sounds like Biden is on the right track. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #20)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:50 PM

55. Oh - I did not know he wrote the 1994 bill. It did not hold up too well.

But hopefully he has learned something since then. He probably is taking a look at Heller as well. A ban on assault rifles was upheld there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:35 AM

110. I don't think Biden should be claiming

credit for the previous AWB because it did nothing to reduce crime with so-called assault weapons. The reason there are so many 'assault weapons' that have been sold since 1994 is BECAUSE of the ban. Prior to the ban, these guns were almost never used in homicides (that is still true) and there were not that many of them in circulation. The ban increased demand for these guns exponentially.

The high-capacity magazines were never difficult to find. They did increase in value however. The manufacturers increased production prior to the 'ban' going into effect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:50 PM

17. I am a (multiple) firearm owner. Have you heard of 'slide bump'?

The difference between semi-auto and auto has been blurred.

There is technology out there that has changed the game.

That being said, I am against any and all regulation.

I am a firm believer in short-barrelled shotguns for home defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DollarBillHines (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:43 PM

149. Spoken like a true

Gungeoneer who can only repeat NRA talking points with no regard for the rest of the country as long as you get to own as many fucking guns and as much ammo as you want. Not as many or as much as you NEED, but as many and as much as you WANT.

You and your fellow NRA gun fetishists are a large part of the gun problem in the USA. You must be very proud to have helped to make the USA the holder of the world record for gun deaths and injuries year after year.

You are "against any and all regulation?" You ain't seen nothing yet Bubba...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #149)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:54 PM

154. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #149)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:30 PM

162. If we are to have any hope of ever improving the gun laws in our nation ...

we first need to stop insulting each other.

But since I do not favor registration, bans and confiscations I see no problem with your side being impolite as it will just alienate many gun owners who might decide to support a measure such as another assault weapons ban which will accomplish little or nothing.

I will also point out that gun owners are just as distressed over the recent school shooting as you are and we hope to find ways to as much as possible keep the firearms out of the hands of violent criminals and those who have potentially dangerous mental issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #149)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 07:32 PM

170. I am not NRA

As a matter of fact, I detest those fuckers. Nice leap to conclusion, though maybe a tad knee-jerk.

But I do own properties in Sonoma. Mendocino and Humboldt counties. Large, rural and hillside properties. I'll be damned if I am going to try and chase fully-armed Mexicans away while under-armed. Luckily, the situation has never gotten to the point of taking/making fire.

But I would kill them all without blinking an eye if I had to.

And don't call me 'Bubba', Hot Rod. I am a combat vet in my 60's and have seen my fair share of Bad.

I don't give a fuck about regulation because - given the above - I would never comply. I will not let the fucking Mexicans control my land. They can grow theirs somewhere else, I'll grow my own.

Thank you for your time.

Our world is not simply black-and-white. There are a gazillion shades of gray.
DBH

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:06 PM

33. There is a semantic difference but not an important difference.

The kind of semi-automatic used by Lanza is far too destructive to not be strictly regulated.

Did you break the speed limit at 120 MPH or 180 MPH? I don't care. You should lose your license.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:46 PM

52. Both need to be removed form our country yesterday! It does not matter what you call it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:14 PM

71. continually bizarre

Last edited Mon Dec 24, 2012, 03:24 PM - Edit history (1)

that gun proponents equate ignorance with someone not having spent their lives practicing to kill people. Call me silly, but I spent my life acquiring higher education and reading. We have every right to stand up against the industry of mass murder without having been titillated by its hardware. Those framing laws need to have a specific knowledge of guns--which is where concerned gun owners and the ATF can be of assistance. But this NRA meme that we are all stupid because we don't spend our lives fantasizing about shooting 100 bullets at hypothetical bad guys is thoroughly offensive.

I might argue that those who put guns above human life show themselves to lack the basic human decency to participate meaningfully in a public conversation. But then they are backed by a multi-billion dollar (perhaps trillion) gun industry that ensures their voices are the ones that prevail. Aligning oneself with corporate capital turns out to be quite handy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #71)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:07 AM

100. Offensive is right. good post. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #71)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:34 AM

109. Really? I'm seeing assistance called "derailing"

I think a lot of people are making fundamental category errors here by equating a weapon's cosmetics with its power, but anytime somebody points that out here we're immediately accused of derailing or spouting NRA talking points.

I'm trying to help. So are a lot of people here. Seriously.

If you want to make mass shootings impossible, you'll have to get rid of all semi-automatics with detachable magazines. I don't think that can be done, but that needs to be your goal. That will involve getting rid of the majority of guns people own, the majority of guns hunters use, and the majority of handguns that people own for self and home defense. This is a huge task: you're not simply going after a fringe of gun owners who like rare weapons, you are actually going to have to live up to the NRA predictions that you're going to come and take away most people's guns. Maybe that's a good idea, maybe it's not, but we really are trying to help you when we're pointing out that that's what you want to do.

And even then, after doing all that, that's only going to be of marginal use in preventing the significantly more common type of gun homicide where one person shoots one other person he knows with a single bullet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #109)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 03:08 AM

115. Diane Feinstein has legislation

She will introduce in early Jan. It lists certain kinds of weapons and bans extended magazines. The rest of us are not creating legislation, but I'm sure Senator Feinstein would welcome your help.

In the meantime the rest of us will continue to express our frustration and opposition toward guns with a capacity to kill 100 people in a minute, regardless of what they are called.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #109)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 03:10 AM

116. And if you want to assist

In banning handguns that produce those "significantly more common deaths," we would love your "help.". Oh, was that not what you had in mind?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #116)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 10:54 AM

122. No, that was what I have in mind. I'd like to see handguns significantly restricted

And I think messing around with long guns is a counterproductive distraction

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #109)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 03:48 PM

146. Hog wallow. It is the mindset that is attracted to the military knockoffs that is a major problem.

 

Let's start with banning the likes of the military knockoffs, such as the Bushmaster style weapons outright. Since they can so easily be made, for all intents and purposes, fully automatic, with the addition of a simple rubber band, license them the same way machine guns are now. Can't afford it? Turn it in! Civilians do not need weapons designed to hunt and kill humans.
Extended magazines, heavily regulate or ban them. Nothing over 10 rounds for hand guns (NO extended clips) and 5 rounds for long (hunting) guns.
This is only a huge task because this country is so absolutely awash in guns, far in excess of any other non 3rd world country. If the gun nuts feel deprived, too bad. Their victims had hobbies and did enjoyable thing too - till they were deprived of their basic right to live by some nut with an easily obtained gun. Guns ARE the problem. We need to start dealing with the problem (guns) now and stop blaming any and everything else for the current lethal gun problem. Discussing the similar operating mechanics of various weapons is just trying to sidetrack the discussion. Things are not getting any better and in fact are getting worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #109)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:57 PM

155. Trying to help?

Help who, or what? You and your Gungeoneer buddies have helped us enough, thank you very much.

You've helped us become the world's leading contender in the mass killings of innocent children. You've helped the NRA to instill so much fear in our citizenry that we've armed ourselves to the teeth and kill our neighbors and family members by "mistake." You've helped the NRA turn ordinary Americans into vigilantes (see Zimmerman).

You've helped us become the holder of the world's record for annual gun deaths and injuries. You've helped us arm the criminals on our streets because you believe that "private" sales should be allowed without regulation. You've "helped" us by supporting the NRA's right-wing, Republican agenda, and helping to elect neoconservative assholes who have brought this country to the brink of crime-ridden financial and moral bankruptcy.

Yeah, you certainly "helped" this country by worshiping the fucking NRA and its vile, right-wing leaders. Please, don't help us anymore. It's too late for you to try and have a "civil" discussion -- you had your chance, now it's our turn to ignore you. Just go away and stroke your fucking gun in the privacy of your own home. We're tired of you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #155)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:18 PM

158. Who the **** do you think I am and you are?

"My gungeoneer buddies"? I post there once in a blue moon. I've consistently opposed brand-specific bans on firearms because they're stupid, and consistently supported reducing the number of handguns in circulation through a variety of measures. Get over yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #158)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:26 PM

159. No my gunner friend, it's

you who should get over YOURself. You help is neither needed, nor wanted. Go away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #71)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 03:15 PM

145. I second that. Good post.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:17 PM

72. It used to be Uzi's now it's Bushmasters, nothing much different?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:35 PM

79. Not true

As another poster said this morning, we don't care what kind of technical jargon you want to throw at us, whether you're using the Douchemaster rifle or the Desert Beagle. It's just so much jargon-filled fluff designed to detract from the actual problem at hand.

Here's a different example to illustrate my point. Let's say you have strong opinions about keeping the Internet free and open and as devoid from government oversight as possible--many of us here do feel that way. Well, it just so happens that I'm a network engineer by trade. I know all the ins and outs of what makes the Internet work, and for that matter, what makes the Internet break. In our example, you start an OP about policy you'd like to see hold sway over US Internet users, something to do with privacy, DRM, government oversight, whatever. Now, how would you feel if I spammed your thread with lots of posts about how you're not a network engineer or a systems engineer, so you can't possibly know all of the underlying technical details that are prerequisite to enacting whatever policy you're interested in. If I told you that your position was weakened and that you looked foolish because you don't even know what BGP route poisoning means, you'd rightly conclude that I was a real prick. You'd also rightly conclude that you don't need to possess ANY of that specialized knowledge in order to understand how you'd like US Internet policy to work. Same thing with guns. I don't need to know about the muzzle velocity of the xr26blah, nor do I care whether you call it an assault rifle or a love stick. I just want it gone, because it's the device that fires the bullets that kills the kids. I don't need to know how to field strip the gun. I don't need to know how quickly a determined psychopath can reload. You don't need to know how to redistribute one routing protocol into another, you just need to know that you don't want the NSA keeping a copy of everything you've ever done on the Internet. Both examples have practical, real-world limitations. I could wish for a law that required bullets to travel no more than 200 feet per second, but physics is going to deny my request, no questions asked. And you could hope for a law that would require 10Gigabit Internet connections to every home using existing phone wires. But again, physics is going to override your request. That's where the "common sense" part of gun control comes in.

You might have a point if the root of the argument was based on technical merits. But the root of the problem is policy, attitude, and gun culture in general. Valid points to counter gun culture are not to be found within the technical details that make guns shoot bullets, but with the laws that govern the people who purchase and use guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #79)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:11 AM

102. +1 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #79)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:39 AM

112. OK, but if I wanted to end multihoming and my solution was to ban BGP ...

... you would be right to point out that I must be mistaken either about what multihoming is or what BGP is (and you'd probably even know what error I was making; that's a confusion someone casually familiar with networking protocols might have).

And that's literally the level of category error we're having about gun policy. People want to end gun violence. People's solution is to ban certain classes of firearms. At that point, what those actual classes of firearms actually are becomes a very important question, and it's not derailing at all to be clear about what a given ban would mean.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 02:32 AM

114. The bickering over details is how the NRA exhausts opponents of mass murder weapons

The NRA-GOP is master of minor distinctions.

Connecticut supposed has one of the strongest Assault Weapon Bans in the country, yet the killer's straw buyer purchased the mass murder machine legally, because the BUSHMASTER AR-15 M4 was not on the banned list of the federal ban and not on the banned list for the state ban.

This is the same weapon that killed 12 and wounded 58 in the Aurora Colorado Theater Shooting.

Any weapon-type used in Mass Murders of ten or more people need to be recalled and slagged.

The BUSHMASTER company had to pay half a million dollars for the lawsuit settlement of the DC Snipers who used the same type model to kill 10.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to _Liann_ (Reply #114)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 12:02 PM

136. A weapon similar to the Bushmaster WAS NOT

used to kill 12 people in Aurora. That gun jammed after just a few rounds BECAUSE of the high capacity magazine used. A pump shotgun was used after the other gun was jammed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 10:49 AM

121. It's a "distinction without a difference".

Logical Fallacies:

Distinction Without a Difference

Description: The assertion that a position is different from another position based on the language, when in fact, both positions are exactly the same -- at least in practice or practical terms.

Distinction without a difference is a fallacy that often appears in philosophical or political debate. The basic version of the fallacy occurs when a person prefers, or insists on, one term to a synonymous term, even though there is no substantive difference in meaning between the two. The arguer will typically claim that a nuanced distinction between two terms makes them incompatible as synonyms. While a linguistic distinction may in fact occur, if the generally accepted meaning of both terms are not changed by the distinction, the arguer is creating a logical fallacy. Distinction without a difference is frequently an aspect of political arguments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:54 PM

153. There is a difference but you don't really care unless you LOVE this ad...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:30 PM

3. Ignorance makes bad preparation for writing laws. For example, those who want to bad the evil

 

semi-automatic would ban one of the most famous and widely used shotguns for hunting and competition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #3)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:42 PM

7. And...as I told my congress critter

Forget about looks, but go for actually mechanical internal workings of the gun.

Personally, breath easy, it's not going to happen...the 1934 ...oh never mind, it's like talking to a wall.

By the way, extended mags for these? Or drums? That is the minimum people are thinking. Don't worry, current congress will not go there either. Bunch of cowards that they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #3)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:43 PM

10. And, conversely, these non-semi-automatic models would be A-OK.

According to the "ban all semi-automatic weapons" approach.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #10)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:53 PM

21. I didn't say that. I proved the term semi automatic does not mean all firearms with that type action

 

are evil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #21)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:58 PM

24. I wasn't contesting your point...

Just extending the point that ignorance of weapon types is counterproductive.

As much as including those sporting autos in your post among the general group of semiautos that, to many, are all evil, it's also true that careless legislation could miss some pretty brutal pump action weapons, like these drum fed shotguns.

....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #24)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:11 PM

38. Mea culpa. Sad that anti-gun DUers are just a click from a group that IMO has the finest group of

 

Democrats who know nearly all there is worth knowing about the Second Amendment protecting an individual's right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, DU's Gun Control & RKBA Group

All that in the presence of gross ignorance that was just waiting for a mass-murder tragedy to implement the old strategy, "When in danger, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!"

I'm tired of reading post after post of cute little profane utterances and not one, no not one, serious attempt from any from the anti-gun brigade to help prevent another Sandy Hook Tragedy.

If another such tragedy occurs, they will be just as guilty as their bogey man LaPierre and his hated NRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #38)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:32 PM

46. The anti-gun brigade is proposing to limit high capacity magazines and drums.

What are you proposing to help prevent another Sandy Hook?

If another such tragedy occurs, LaPierre and his NRA fans will be complicit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #46)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:41 PM

47. They are proposing more guns, and more guns everywhere, as always.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #46)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:48 PM

54. I have opinions but I want to hear other people's credible ideas. Please post your thoughts at

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #46)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:31 PM

88. pnwmom you conflate magazines with proposals to prevent another Sandy Hook Tragedy. Too many posts

 

have repeated as nauseam the simple fact that hundreds of millions of high capacity magazines are already available.

A ban on possessing them is not an effective option although it might make anti-gun types feel good.

The Sandy Hook LEO report has not been completed but it does appear Adam Lanza had some type of mental-health problem.

That seems to be a common thread with many who commit mass murder.

Mayor Thomas M. Menino of Boston and Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City, cochairmen of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, along with 750 other Mayors want Obama to create a central data base that will include mental-health data on people.

We already have the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, and now the new health care record system that can easily share data.

All that's needed is to identify the Diagnosis Related Group codes that place a person at risk of becoming a mass murderer and add their name and appropriate data and create the central data base Bloomberg and his mayors want.

Even better, identify the prescription drugs that might trigger a mass murder episode and whenever a patient fills a prescription add that incident to the central data base. That would give our Attorney General all the data needed to monitor in real time people who science and health care professionals have profiled as mass murder risks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #88)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:05 PM

91. Why isn't it an effective option to ban the possession of high capacity magazines?

We wouldn't even have to build new prisons. We could replace all the people in prison for simple marijuana possession with people convicted of illegal possession of high capacity magazines.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #91)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:27 PM

93. "Too many posts have repeated ad nauseam the simple fact that hundreds of millions of high capacity

 

magazines are already available."

Criminals aren't affected by laws and IMO another ban on high capacity magazines like the expired AWB will produce the same results. The defunct AWB set the limit at ten rounds.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied the "assault weapon" ban and other gun control attempts, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence".

"First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws, Findings from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services" October 3, 2003, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/117297122

People who want to commit mass murder probably have mental-health problems and I don't know how a renewed AWB that didn't work before will affect them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #93)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:26 PM

96. If criminals aren't affected by laws, why do we have ANY criminal laws?

The theory that criminals aren't affected by laws is a favorite NRA trope, but it's just nonsense. If it were true, then we wouldn't ever have laws against any crimes. Why have any laws against rape? Criminals aren't affected by laws. Why have any laws against murder? Criminals aren't affected by laws. Etc., etc.

I don't think we should renew the old AWB law. It had holes you could drive an armored tank through. We should replace it with a more expansive law without the gun show and private seller loopholes. And serious penalties.

Other countries have people with mental health problems and yet don't have the gun deaths that we do -- because they restrict the manufacture and sale of guns, especially high-powered, high-capacity guns. The problem is the type of weapons we make available to almost anyone, not the fact that we have people in the US with mental health problems -- as every country does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #96)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:40 PM

97. "why do we have ANY criminal laws?" Excellent question to which I also would like an answer.

 

We have several professionals from various fields who are regular DUers and regulars on DU's Justice & Public Safety Gun Control & RKBA (Group)

Please post your question there because I would like to read their opinions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #97)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 12:16 AM

98. Simple. I don't need to do a survey.

Because without criminal laws which carry criminal penalties, we'd be living in a society where people ran around with Ak-47s, making their own personal laws and exacting their own penalties.

Everyone would be dirty Harry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #93)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:19 PM

142. I wonder what all those people are doing in prison, then.

They're not criminals, since criminals are not affected by laws. However did they get there? The answer must be fascinating!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggo (Reply #142)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:24 PM

143. Ask pnwmom #96 nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #143)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:04 PM

163. Yeah, but you and me both know they ain't all pot smokers.

Not by a long shot. Saying laws don't affect criminals is as dumb as it is wrong. A new argument is needed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #91)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 02:10 AM

113. Because making the magazines illegal would be as ineffective as making marijuana illegal has been

And they're ridiculously easy to make: they're a box with a spring in them. Much easier than growing your own pot, which people do.

I doubt the ban would do much harm; it just seems kind of pointless to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #113)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:54 AM

117. You can require guns not to be made with removable magazines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #117)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 10:21 AM

120. Yes! That you can do

I'm glad the board seems to be moving towards that idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #38)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 09:12 AM

87. HA HA- Only the pro-gunners want to or can help with good gun regulations, HA HA

It's everybody else fault if there's another massacre?
That is a steaming pile of bullshit.
No one is buying it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #87)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:28 PM

147. Actually they already have helped with gun regulations. That is why we are having this problem now.

 

Saner people need to work on the solution this time around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:39 AM

133. It took me 10 minutes to stop laughing at this

RKBA doesn't even admit that Semi automatics use automatic cycling just like fully auto and burst fire weapons. One even said that automatic pistols were named for the Colt ammunition rather than the Colt ammunition being named for the type of weapon it was designed for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #133)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 12:11 PM

138. The cycling is automatic in both

automatic and semi-automatic firearms, but the firing of the rounds are automatic (one trigger pull = multiple rounds fired), and semi-automatic (one trigger pull = one round being fired).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #138)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:06 PM

141. Except prior to the NRA redefinition project

automatic weapons were named for the cycle. Hence handguns were always called automatic and now they are being termed "semi-auto". Similarly all long guns operating on that cycle were automatic now RKBA only allows that term for fully auto weapons. The same tactics have been used to convert scary "anti-abortion" activists into "pro-life" life ones. It's all for publicity only

As I said one of the posters, in all seriousness said that automatic pistols were named for the Colt ammunition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #10)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:09 PM

36. I'm saying that guns should be highly restricted, not necessarily banned,

if they allow for a high capacity clip or magazine or drum.

I don't care what category they fall in. Hunters don't need to use rifles that can shoot 30 times without reloading.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:54 PM

22. "pause to reload"

With truly minimal practice, a person can learn to change a magazine in about one second flat. Two if they're not very coordinated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #22)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:11 PM

37. Amy Bishop, the woman who shot other faculty at Alabama U,

was stymied when her single gun either ran out of ammo or malfunctioned. That gave other people in the room time to escape.

I say we start with at least reducing the chance that another Amy Bishop will succeed in murdering a roomful of people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #37)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:25 PM

40. Just because one person was notably incompetent...

...doesn't mean most are. Magazine capacity limits are perfect examples of "feel good" legislation that will accomplish little to nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #40)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:32 PM

76. Being psychotic, as many of these shooters are, doesn't tend to enhance competency.

It is unusual for psychotic people to be be able to plan things out to the degree of some of the most notorious shooters. We don't tend to hear as much about the Amy Bishops because they're less likely to be successful mass murderers. It's stupid to make it easier for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #76)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:21 AM

80. True. But that's a small number of an already small number.

It might be "stupid" to make it easier for them...but it might also be said to be "stupid" to prioritize a trickle when faced with a flood (like 10k gun-related homicides per year, the majority committed with small, concealable handguns, by habitual criminals).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:22 PM

39. The problem is that many hunting rifles are semi-automatic, though carrying only 4 or 5 rounds.

So when you say, "let's get rid of all semi-automatic rifles," you rile a lot of hunters who have their favorite 30-06 for taking deer.

Mind, I'm not disputing your concern. And yes, hunting rifles just as easily are bolt action. My intent is merely to point out the history, ubiquity, and ordinary use of rifles that also happen to be semi-automatic.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:25 PM

41. most people don't know the difference between a scud missile and a patriot missile

they just know they both kill

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #41)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 02:15 AM

84. Patriots dont kill, they are only fired at other missiles. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:44 PM

50. if I get run over by a car while out walking no one is going to care if it was a Chevy or Ford.

i can't quite figure out why the specific definitions matters so much..carnage is carnage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:45 PM

51. Thank-you!!!!!! +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:03 PM

57. Agreed No Distinction - It Took Lanza 10 Minutes To Slaughter 26 People - 2.6 People Per Minute

Seems a semi automatic weapon is plenty lethal and needs to be outlawed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #57)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:15 PM

60. The difference is that his semi-auto weapon

(that was originally engineered as fully auto for the military and marketed as an M-16) had a magazine that contained 30 rounds, as opposed to 10 or fewer. This has been pointed out upthread.

It also shot faster--even though he had to pull the trigger with each shot, as with most semi-automatic firearms.

There is a distinction, believe it or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to janx (Reply #60)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:21 PM

62. Yes - Maybe - But A Distinction Without Much Merit When Viewed Through The Prism Of Destruction

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #62)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:30 PM

65. You could still create a massacre with a conventional semi-automatic weapon.

It would just take longer. It has been done.

And so yes, I agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:11 PM

59. what if the bullets only travel 1200 feet PER SECOND?

 

Point being, I'm not sure why the OP specifies a velocity... velocity of a bullet seems like a moot point given the context of the current discussion. I'm pretty any velocity over about 600 feet PER SECOND becomes a moot point as it results in a pretty bad day for whomever on the receiving end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #59)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:23 PM

63. As Many Have Pointed Out - The NRA And Gun Apologists Don't Seem To Demonstrate Much Compassion

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #63)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 10:59 AM

123. You're right: there's a lot of fact-vomiting and mansplaining

And very little concern about how descriptions and images of firearms viscerally upset and trigger (no pun intended) some people.

That's unfortunate, it's unhelpful, and to the extent that I've done it, I'm sorry (I'm trying not to; I'm the same way with computers, too, and it's a hard habit to break).

That said, I'm not sorry for being specific and accurate about what terms like "semi-automatic" and "automatic" and "assault weapon" mean when they are the basis of the laws people want to see enacted. If I wanted to end drunk driving deaths and to do that was trying to ban the sale of vodka cocktails, you would do the same thing, I think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #123)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:37 AM

132. My Response - Repeal The 2nd Amendment - Outlaw All Firearms Now! - The Latest, Two Firefighters Dead

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #132)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:41 AM

134. And I think doing that would kill a whole lot of people

Just like banning alcohol did and banning drugs does. Imagine a parallel to the nightmare that is the DEA in the ATF. Just as much abuse and discrimination in applying the laws. Another reason to lock up minorities. Another set of black market turf wars. Another class of empowered smugglers.

Please have the charity to assume that I also value human life; I do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #134)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:43 AM

135. I Am Past Half Measures With The Body Count Steadily Rising - I Do Not Support Your Position

For me there is no middle ground.

The deaths of the two firefighters this morning only strengthens my resolve to fight all half measures moving forward.

Repeal the 2nd Amendment NOW!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:25 PM

64. Actually semi-automatics may be more deadly under the circumstances we worry about. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 10:41 PM

67. Proposed solution.

Remove the Hughes amendment. Open the NFA registry for use.
Extend the NFA registry downward to include semi-autos just like full auto weapons.

This causes:

1. No NICS check for purchase, you get a FULL background check.
2. Registration. *
3. BATFE can show up and inspect the weapon as it feels like it. *
4. 200$ tax stamp per weapon.

*These items reduce straw purchases and illegal transfers.
All of this closes the 'gun show loophole' for these weapons, as they CANNOT be transferred privately without incurring a felony.


Lawfully owned fully automatic weapons have been used in less than 10 crimes since 1934, when the NFA registry was enacted. The registry itself is part of the reason why.

This is fully legal and permissible even with the presence of the 2nd amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:08 PM

70. if it looks like only a military person should be carrying it, it's a machine gun.

i think only muskets should be legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pansypoo53219 (Reply #70)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:28 AM

107. What makes a weapon look like only a military person should be carrying it?

Is it the matte black finish? The pistol grip?

I mean, "machine gun" already means something, which is not what you're using it to mean, but ok: what makes a weapon look like only a military person should be carrying it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:20 PM

73. Do most people really not care?

Using DU as a sampling, it would appear that most do care based on all the posts that talk about it, and usually getting the terms mixed up. If they really did not care, they would not be trying to discuss this level of detail in their gun posts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 02:09 AM

82. I think pro-gun folks are deliberately trying to steer discussions into the weeds with these

esoteric distinctions. I know the difference between semi-automatic and fully automatic. What I DONT know is the demarcation point between whether a gun is an assault weapon or not. But I dont care and it is irrelevant IMHO.

Like you said, the point is not whether a gun meets a particular definition, it's how much damage it can do in a short amount of time. That is what I care about, that is what you care about, that is what most of us care about.

I have seen several tv appearances by pro-gun folks where the discussions seemed to be deliberately steered by the pro-gun folks to a discussion whether a given gun like the Bushmaster .223 is an 'assault rifle' or not and the point of the segment was then completely lost.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #82)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:37 PM

89. "how much damage it can do in a short amount of time" What is your specification? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #89)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 03:40 PM

90. My 'specification' is a public discourse on the subject. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #90)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:13 PM

92. We've had "public discourse" that produced the AWB. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

 

studied the "assault weapon" ban and other gun control attempts, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence". See http://www.democraticunderground.com/117297122

Summary:
1. Extensive public discourse,
2. Passed AWB September 13, 1994,
3. AWB expired September 13, 2004,
4. CDC studied AWB concluded no evidence it affected violent crime,
5. You propose more "public discourse"?

If talk could solve a problem, Congress would already have us at full employment and the $17 trillion debt paid off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to stevenleser (Reply #94)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:59 PM

95. So we disagree. See link below. The anti-gun community has been trying for decades to

 

prove, show, or even suggest that guns cause crime.

In spite of all that effort the best they can do is vilify those who support RKBA.

Anti-gun types remind me most of creationists and intelligent design believers who oppose evolution and were told to take your best shot in the federal case Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.

Surely, if there is even a modicum of causality between guns and crime, there would have been a slight suggestion in the studies examined by the National Academy of Sciences select committee and reported in "Firearms and Violence, A Critical Review".

ON EDIT ADD http://www.democraticunderground.com/117297122

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #89)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 12:07 PM

137. see, that's the weeds thing he was talking about. Not taking the bait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #82)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 01:23 AM

104. No, I think our party has been burned before by people who know squat about guns writing laws

that wind up being stupid laws that don't actually solve anything. e.g. the assault weapons ban under which the Bushmaster that Lanza used was still legal. You know, the one you're advocating for, and calling people like me who oppose it crazy, and then attacking me for trying to describe to you what it would actually do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #104)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 07:44 AM

118. No, I didnt say that. I dont care about the things you are talking about. Thats what I am saying.

Can a gun kill 20 children in 3 minutes? Get it off the streets, make it illegal for anyone other than law enforcement and military to own, possess and use.

I dont care what esoteric classifications you want to ascribe to guns. I have no interest in talking about them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #82)


Response to stevenleser (Reply #82)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:12 AM

125. Exactly. And of course they know more about it

I'm not interested in guns and their categories. Only in how much damage they can do in a short time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #82)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 12:19 PM

139. "What I DONT know is the demarcation point between whether a gun is an assault weapon or not.

But I dont care and it is irrelevant IMHO."

Neither did Joe Biden when he wrote the 1994 AWB. That's why it was a dismal failire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #139)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 12:25 PM

140. No, it was a dismal failure because it concerned an obscure and irrelevant classification.

Can a given weapon kill a lot of people in a short amount of time. That is the only relevant criteria.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #140)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:29 PM

161. Thank you. That's a good criterion. It also is a criterion...

... that makes us live up to the NRA's dire prophecies, because it will involve taking a majority of guns from a majority of gun owners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #161)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:56 PM

168. And that should make me unhappy why exactly?

I want to live in a society where people dont have to fear that some angry/distraught/homicidal/etc. person is going to decide to shoot them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #168)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 07:08 PM

169. Obviously I can't speak for you personally

I keep seeing that we aren't coming after everybody's guns. If we are, well, then you should be fine with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #82)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:46 PM

150. Does it look like a hunting rifle, or a military weapon - a military knock-off, such as a Bushmaster

 

is an assault weapon.
Hunting rifles are not assault weapons. The military knock-offs are assault weapons, as that is what they were designed to be.
There is more to a weapon than the basic mechanics. There are the looks. The hard-on produced by having an assault weapon in the hands of some people is a problem too. A big problem. There is no need for having assault weapons in the hands of the general public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #150)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:09 PM

164. OK, but you can't do anything with an "assault weapon" that you can't do with a hunting rifle

That's what I keep not getting: why do you care if a gun "looks military" if it operates exactly the same as one that doesn't?

(According to the law, the Bushmaster would be an assault weapon if it had a bayonet lug, but let's assume "assault weapon" means "any semi-auto with a detachable magazine, black finish, and pistol grip".)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #164)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:36 PM

165. Keep reading.

 

There is more to a weapon than the basic mechanics. There are the looks. The hard-on produced by having an assault weapon in the hands of some people is a problem too. A big problem. There is no need for having assault weapons in the hands of the general public.

It is the testosterone charge, making too many think they are grown up, just from having one of these assault weapons, that is absent from a similarly operating hunting rifle.
Also all that it takes is a rubber band to turn these semi-auto's assault weapons into full automatic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #165)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:38 PM

166. The rubber band is just as ineffective with assault weapons as it is with hunting rifles

Every couple of years somebody rediscovers this hoax. Hint number one should be that nobody who does a mass shooting ever tries that.

I did read that part, and I didn't really feel it should be dignified with a response. You're projecting your feelings about firearms onto others, and it's kind of silly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #82)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 08:04 PM

171. Just try to explain that

to the NRA "purists" who insist that civilian assault weapons are so much more inferior for killing purposes than military assault weapons. They reason that if a soldier wouldn't use it in combat, it must be safe for a civilian to own. Especially a civilian who purchased it through a "private sale" with absolutely no paperwork attached, and no background check involved.

The other argument is that the "wrong weapon" might be banned, as if the banning of ANY semi-automatic, high capacity gun would be a bad thing. They only want to educate us for our own good, so that we will understand that the NRA is really our ally, and only wants what's best for our children and the rest of society.

The NRA Gungeon dwellers sincerely believe that they can dazzle us with bullshit through the use of semantics and asinine NRA talking points ("more guns will make us safer..."). It is time for strict regulation and taxation of these deadly rapid fire toys, and a majority of Americans are now saying that enough is enough. The NRA threats that voters will leave the Democratic Party in droves may well in fact be true -- if you define "droves" as a pitiful 4 million delusional NRA members.

A vast majority of American gun owners are sensible, rational, and caring individuals, and do NOT support the NRA or its policies. The NRA's influence is melting right before our eyes, and the People are tired of being bullied by a small number of gun fetishists hiding behind the 2nd Amendment and talking loud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:11 AM

124. I agree - attempts to sidetrack on that issue should result in

asserting they should all be banned if they don't require re-loading after every 3 shots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:14 AM

126. It only took about 15 shots to change the entire world

 

JFK
RFK
MLK
JOHN LENNON
Allard Lowenstein

it's the damage one bullet does, not the quantity of shots

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #126)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:48 PM

151. Tell that to the parents of the 20 kids at Sandy Point.

 

it's the damage one bullet does, not the quantity of shots

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #151)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:02 AM

172. my statement is not in disagreement with your thought

 

Each individual bullet was just as great to that specific parent
as was all the bullets in total

But if you don't agree with my statement, is that meaning that if it were only one child
that parent 's damage was not so great?

Instead of a quick retort, reading what I said is certainly the same as what you said individually

Which is why anything with just one bullet is just as dangerous as multiple bullet thing.
I don't know the difference between names and types of guns, it is just a diversion from the issue at hand.

minutia is the single thing the NRA does to distract from the main raison'd'etre

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:52 PM

152. Would that include handguns? revolvers and other automatics? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:26 PM

160. The reason the difference needs to be pointed out...

...is because much of the discourse assumes that murderers are using military grade machine guns, which is what "assault rifles" are. They are not.

"Assault rifles" are already illegal. Banning them will change nothing. Civil versions are not "assault rifles" because they are not full-auto and because they frankly are not tough enough for battle. "Mil spec" civilian rifles (no full auto) are significantly more expensive than consumer-grade models.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread