Why push for a ban on semi-automatic rifles?

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/09/432...ium=owned&utm_campaign=gun&utm_term=ijamerica

Gun prohibitionists are so obsessed with prohibiting scary looking semi-automatic firearms, they simply ignore the undeniable fact that fewer than 250 homicides are committed with said firearms. While some 5,600 are committed with handguns. Some 2.5 times more homicides committed with hands and feet. But, yeah, banning modern sporting rifles is the answer.

Given the low number of homicides, what benefit would come from banning semi-automatic rifles?

 

No benefit at all. Passing ban laws are simply politicians pandering to their constituents. Feel good laws with no basis in fact are the norm for most liberals.

 

Absolutely none at all. Criminals would still get a hold of those guns and your only stopping law abiding citizens obtaining them legally if they wanted one for pure leisure and/or protection.

We in the UK have strict gun control laws. Gun crimes since then have gone down but every other violent crime has increased. Tells you everything you need to know about gun control.

 

Anyone see anyone in Washingtoon trying to bad AR's at the moment?

 

Personally I think it just boils down to fear, ignorance, and a naive belief that the police will protect them.

They are afraid of taking responsibility for protecting themselves, and prefer to place that responsibility on someone else. Many think that the false illusion of security from laws and police will protect them.

They are also afraid of guns because they are completely ignorant of them. Nothing is more telling than seeing someone who is against guns shooting for the first time. Almost simultaneously they are loving the experience and hating themselves because they enjoy it so much.

Then you have the lawmakers that think they know better than anyone else, and are going to save us from ourselves. Of course, they are more detached from reality than anyone else.

 

You left out the 2013 stats that you only referred to. Without that, parts of your post don't make sense. We can't say that the new number is lower, when you left out the old number.
But the point is taken. Why does the current regime refuse to admit - IT'S THE DRUG TRADE, STUPID.

 

No they're just trying to ban the ammunition and slowly get us down to 1 round magazines right now. They've learned they need baby steps.

 

We are one school shooting away from loosing every semi-automatic firearm in the US at any given moment.

 

what a dishonest website.

it conveniently ignores gun murders caused by unknown types of guns, which could have been rifles as many rifles fire ammo than can also be used in handguns, such as the 22LR

in many states, the number of murders committed by such unknown firearms greatly outweighs the number of murders committed by hands & fists.

 

LOL, you planning on giving yours up, I won't and no one I know would, our County Sherriff stated that they will not enforce any unconstitutional laws so there ya go.

 

not with this Congress.

 

And this is on planet Earth?

 

The fact is Ron, criminals (with the exception of drug cartels) aren't out running around killing people with ARs. They operate in the shadows and you can't exactly stuff one in your shorts.

If you want to see whats killing people, look in a police locker sometime. It's full of hi points, busted up revolvers, sawn off shotguns and 22s. I.E. the cheapest and most mass produced weapons in existence.

They never know when they'll have to ditch the weapon, so they're not going to run out and spend $1-2k for a weapon.

Most of the rifle death statistics are probably related home defense and police use. Hell, 10%+ of the total rifle deaths could be attributed to operation Fast and Furious.

 

Remember after Sandy Hook when the second "assault weapons" ban was introduced which would have included every semi-automatic firearm in the US with a detachable magazine?

Let's not pretend here.

- - - Updated - - -

The FBI is dishonest? That's odd.

Is this another instance where you pretend to be an authority on a subject that you do not understand?

- - - Updated - - -

So we go from the fact that the total prohibition of semi-automatic firearms is on the cusp, to I will give them up?

Good job.

 

that's 100% false

- - - Updated - - -

oh, so there are no ammo that are shot by both handguns and rifles?

 

Not many Ron. There are carbines but the rifles are largely lever action designs that date back a century if not older.

 

Nope.

The bill introduced would have changed the number of features a semi-automatic firearm can possess from two to one. A detachable magazine was one of the listed features. Nearly all semi-automatic firearms in the US utilize a detachable magazine.

You have been corrected on this before. The text to the bill has been provided before. So either you are mindlessly repeating the same bull(*)(*)(*)(*) over and over, or you are intentionally ignoring new and accurate information.

The information provided by the FBI is separated by firearm and not ammunition type. So your question is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

 

the ones listed as "firearm not known" is probably due to the bullet being a 22 LR or other bullet than be used in both a handgun or rifle.

as for the most recent AWB banning all semi-auto rifles, including ones that shoot 22LR, I simply don't believe you.

 

as I naturally assumed, you misunderstood the 2013 AWB bill.

it banned weapons that have a detachable magazine PLUS 1 so-called assault-weapon feature.

simply having a detachable magazine did not make a semi-auto firearm illegal.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/150


...this means that any semi-auto rifle/shortgun that took a detachable magazine was legal, as long as it did not have a pistol grip, a forward grip; a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock, a grenade or rocket launcher, a barrel shroud, or a threaded barrel.

there are more than a few semi-auto rifles that would still have been legal.

 

Thanks, I was imply asking who was pushing a Bill to ban them and would you give them up, you answered neither, good job.

 

Even if thats true it's still ridiculously stupid and underlies a gross misunderstanding of reality.

Maybe that's why hammers and baseball bats kill 50% more people than rifles, they have built in pistol grips.

 

Did you ask a question? How can I answer a question without a question being posed? LOL

I think this is the part where you say "I misread your post".

- - - Updated - - -

*shrugs

You have been provided the bill in the past, and you continue to believe your fantasy. Doesn't matter to me.

- - - Updated - - -

lol

Which is after there was little support for the first introduction of the bill.

 

You mean like this question I asked in my first post:
"Anyone see anyone in Washingtoon trying to ban AR's at the moment?"
or the one if I asked you if you were going to give yours up?
Yes, it about time you admitted you misread my post, especially since you missed the question entirely.

 

prove it.

i simply don't believe you

 

I still get up at 0645. So that does not matter to me.

- - - Updated - - -

You are obsessing over a non-issue.