Some objects are better suited to certain actions that others. In fact some objects are purpose designed for certain actions. Specifically that last rifle is purposed designed for killing lots of people quickly. What I want is irrelevant. I have no say on any of this.
Those are all assault rifles.. What some law defines them as is subject to change and limited to jurisdiction. And you may have 15,000 of them in circulation, but it only takes one. An Assault Rifle is something specific. It is a high capacity rifle that uses intermediate sized rounds. Literally Sturmgewehr. Storm Rifle. Common translation? Assault rifle. You may wish to equate an assault rifle with a cricket bat or a knife, but that is quite ridiculous and shows how unwilling you are to approach the subject matter honestly and reasonably. That frankly you have no understanding or sympathy for the damage one of these things is able to do. To whit, you probably aren't mature enough to own one and in your case a ban would undoubtedly be a sensible idea. You can still have fun shooting one on your Xbox. Safely and with zero risk to others.
No, none of those are "assault rifles". One of those is an "assault weapon". We have 15 million of them in circulation. Since the introduction of the semiauto AR-15 to the civilian market in 1964, one has been used in a mass shooting at a K-12 school 3 times. Children are in more danger from parents' bare hands than they are from all AR-15s. On average since 2004, 13 people per year have been killed in a mass shooting where an "assault weapon" was used. Water, on average, is used to murder over 40 people per year. Water has been shown to be more deadly than an AR-15 used in a mass shooting in the US.
All your argument is based on your personal opinion. You contradict yourself, but thats what gun banners do.
Not according to xenamnes’ “logic” in the past when people use analogies. He jumps all over them about it not being relevant to the discussion. I’m just going by HIS criteria.
Sorry life isn't so convenient people will spot that M-4 the minute you come through the door some one will shout a warning and you'll be lucky to get of ten shots before you've been gang tackled or the room is empty. Guns aren't magic dude. Meanwhile I can walk in concealed with a Berretta and a fifteen round magazine plus a couple of spares concealed find the perfect firing position.and wait for the perfect moment.
I think the dishonesty lies with your posts. As shown in the Mother Jones link below, "assault weapons", ie, AR-15 and similar rifles, have been used to kill an average of 13 people per year since the end of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. Blunt instruments and blades, however, account for about 1600 and 1500 deaths per year according to the FBI link below. That's two orders of magnitudes more deaths each year from "cricket bats" (and similar) and "knives" (and other bladed weapons) than from "assault weapons" in mass shootings. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/ https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s I understand the damage that all weapons can do. I served in our military, I hunt, I shoot long distance and I compete in 3 Gun. All guns are dangerous. That's not sufficient reason to ban any of them See Caetano v Massachusetts. Interesting viewpoint. You statement implies that you would consider that some people are mature to own one if lack of maturity is a condition of banning ownership. You should note that every single AWB bill proposed to Congress by the Democrats grandfathers ownership of existing firearms, so even with a ban I could still retain ownership of the firearms I have now. I practice and compete with my firearms safely and with zero risk to others. Regarding maturity, it seems that the UK government feels that almost no British citizen is mature enough to own a handgun.
Depends. An apartment is a different solution from a house. Even the building materials of the homes in your neighborhood can affect the choice of weapon. I'd check on ammo availability in some areas as well, Frangible ammo being a good choice no matter what weapon you use in an apartment
With that reply you have fully and clearly exposed yourself as someone who really doesn't know what you are talking about, one of those firearms pictured is not even a rifle, nor less an Assault Rifle. Maybe try learning a lot more about the subject before making such foolish statements going forward.
Try discussing the subject honestly and without pedantry. You will find people treat you like an adult when you do.
BS it is designed to punch holes in paper or other inanimate objects since that is what the overwhelming amount of ammunition is expended on in this country.
Certainly a Beretta is what I had in mind when I was envisioning an assault pistol. And pistols are definitely the criminals weapon of choice due to concealability. However the relative kill power of an M4 is obvious and this is the reason soldiers sport assault rifles over their pistols in combat.
No it isn't. It's designed to kill many people quickly. It can be used to shoot holes in paper, (and often is) just as a car can be used to run people over (and rarely is). But neither are designed for that purpose. There are guns specifically designed to shoot holes in paper, by the way, you will find them at fairgrounds.
After you. But then I don't think you are being dishonest. That would Imply that I thought you actually had the first clue what the hell you are talking about and after reading a few of your posts on this subject it is pretty clear that you not only don't have any damn idea what you're talking about but you are adamant in your refusal to actually learn anything at all about the subject matter at hand.
PLease tell me what the difference between being killed by a pistol and being killed by a rifle is? Last I checked dead and buried is dead and buried. By the way pistols are the primary weapon of almost every police force in the world.
No it isn't. Rifles designed for the military are based on military specifications, which are based on doctrine and tactics. There is no military mission or tactic where a soldier is expected to kill many people quickly with the service rifle. The mission of killing many people quickly falls to aerial bombs and rockets, artillery and mortars, and crew served weapons like machineguns. When one is charged with murder, the design intent of the weapon used isn't considered in the trial.
Soldiers use what they are issued. In WW1, bolt action rifles and shotguns were the issued weapons. Can we ban those because soldiers used them? Bolt action rifles in large caliber were the weapon of issue in WWII, accounting for many more deaths than any version of the M16/M4 has. "Relative kill power" isn't a reason a firearm can be banned in the US.
You have nothing to teach mate. You seem to think what you are saying is not general knowledge that you are perhaps party to some specialist of privileged information. That you are somehow more knowledgeable than the people you are discussing this with and hence you opinion is od superior value. But you aren't and it isn't. That's just a conceit you have to make yourself feel better.
And why aren't they still being issued with bolt action rifles? Answer because an assault rifle has more kill power. Tommy Gun was banned due to relative kill power. Fully automatics are banned because of relative kill power. A firearm in the US can be banned due to relative kill power and they are banned in the US because of relative kill power. Will the AR 15 be? Yes, it will be used in more child massacres and their will be a public backlash. This is inevitable.
I am discussing the subject honestly, the problem is in post 577 you made a outrageous and blatantly false statement, claiming a shotgun was an Assault Rifle, when it is not even a rifle to begin with. You clearly do not understand firearms and having a deep understanding of a subject in imperative to being able to discuss it like an adult. This is not an Assault Rifle.
Once again you are clearly showing you ignorance of firearms, "Tommy Guns" fire pistol ammunition, not high power rifle ammunition. And they are not banned in the U.S., you can order them on-line. https://grabagun.com/kahr-arms-t1d-1927a1-dlx-45a-10r-only.html
Does it have more kill power? The service rifle one of the least dangerous weapons issued to the soldier, and the current one has a pretty anemic round to boot. All of this is moot however; as AR-15s are in common use for lawful purposes, they are protected under the Second Amendment.
