There is no need to be aggressively stupid here

I do.

However, what is a toy army gun?

I am curious. If it is obvious, then define it.

 

Your best post since you joined this forum.

 

The laws are going to change. Children being shot in the head multiple times and their little bodies being ground down like meat to be grilled... will change laws.

As usual, not everyone will be happy, but it is literally INSANE to not properly regulate weapons.

 

Frat, we're talking about real weapons here, not the ones that you use in Halo.

 

A "toy army gun" in this context is a gun that one can associate with being something used in the military, but because it's size is smaller and reduced capabilities so that civilians can play with it, it is a "toy army gun". You are taking it literal for some reason. He is not saying that it is an actual toy like a children's toy or that it is a gun used in the army. That's why I said it was pretty obvious.

 

No, it's not obvious at all as the term was simply fabricated by the poster. But since you seem to think it is so obvious, please tell us what it means and how it is at all relevant to the gun control debate.

 

It means what it says.



A toy played with by boys pretending to be men.

 

... but the AR-15 is not reduced in size for civilian use. Many are actually manufactured to be longer because the M4 is too short for 01 FFL dealers to sell, and require a NFA tax stamp through a Class III dealer.

I still fail to see how the term and definition accurately describe an AR-15.

 

I'm not a gun expert. I have some skeet shooting guns and a simple handgun in my house for protection. All I know is there is absolutely no reason that civilians need any type of weapon whatsoever that can shoot 100s of rounds in minutes randomly killing children and people with ease. There is no reason, and saying that just because they can find the weapon regardless of it being banned does not matter to me. It should not be legal to produce and sell anything that has those capabilities to civilians.

 

Firearms are not toys in any sense of the word.

 

I don't think you guys understand what facetious is. You have to be smarter than this.

 

Most firearms short of single shot rifles are capable of placing multiple rounds down range.

Ironically, your handgun is included in your statement regarding firearms no one needs.

 

I am proposing reasonable people have reasonable discussions that don't start with "what if some guy invaded your house and was raping your daughter?"

I am proposing reasonable discussions that address the issues and how we can reduce the number and impact of these events.

For one:

Partner with the NRA to provide free training and certification for all types of firearms. People who've received this training tend to be much more responsible (there are exceptions) in firearm safety. The restriction comes in that you don't get to buy ammunition unless you've present an NRA certification for a weapon that uses the ammunition you're trying to buy.

I, for one, to get this would be willing to eliminate licensing and carry permits (but not registration) because I think this training could help reduce the number of events greatly and the cost savings (in terms of police and medical care) would more than cover the cost of the training.

 

Strawman, my firearm can not shoot 100 rounds in couple minutes nor do I know how to create my own clip that can hold 30+ rounds. Stick to the point at hand here and stop with the strawmans.

 

Learn to reload.

In my self-defense course we shot and reloaded quite a bit. One hundred rounds in a couple minutes is quite doable.

 

Stop being reactionary. The amount of gun deaths to guns ratio is extremely small.

You don't have a right to take guns away. This is the one issue Neocons and Libertarians agree on and will fight for. You're going to lose this fight.

 

Assuming that the requirement are not arbitrarily created and the costs kept to minimum or none, I don't mind the idea of training classes.

After my concealed carry class, I am have come to realize that many people do not understand how to handle a firearm.

The CCW requirements in Colorado are pathetic.

 

Please explain the utilitarian reasons for the design of the AR15.

What are the hunting advantages of a weapon with this design?
Is this weapon more accurate?

Or is it just designed to look like an army gun so big boys can pretend to be army guys?

 

Strawman once again. You can shoot far more rounds much quicker with a gun like the AR-15. I have no clue why you are defending it to this length. It was just used to kill 20 children really quickly and inject tons of bullets in them at a rapid pace. Why would you be so eager to defend a weapon that was used for this?

 

You mean magazines, and according to your own logic, that makes you sick, as handguns were used in the Virginia Tech massacre which killed thirty-two people. Sick, dude.

 

I guess you don't understand that in a serious debate about gun control using facetious terms like "toy army gun" is juvenile and immaterial to the debate.

 

In other words, it is just some nonsense term you fabricated out of ignorance.

 

Yes, the NATO rounds are specifically designed NOT to be as powerful I believe.

 

Clearly.

A pistol has those capabilities.

 

Lanza left the shotgun in the car. Do you think if he used that gun there would have been less carnage?