How easy is it to build an "assault rifle"...

Semi-auto-only weapons are not assault rifles.

Also, the size of the magazine that is inserted into the gun has no bearing on whether it is an assault rifle.

Short range guns like shotguns and handguns are not assault weapons.

 

5.56 is a tad more potent. Higher chamber pressures.

 

Where is this rule written? Is there a link?

What is wrong with truncating?

 

Centerfire rifles punch through Kevlar.

 

That is incorrect. It says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The Second Amendment mandates that we always need it.

Full auto weapons were outlawed some 40 years ago.

You guys already blew your chances at restricting magazine sizes. You will not be able to do it now.

No assault weapon that is (or was ever) legally owned by an American civilian has ever been used to commit a crime.

AR-15s don't do that either.

I actually once thought that the left was going to succeed at restricting magazine size.

But they blew it by focusing on stuff like pistol grips and flash suppressors.

Now it is clear that neither the courts or the voters are going to let magazine size be restricted.

Bans on pistol grips (and bullets?) are not about saving lives. The only point is to violate people's civil liberties for no reason.

And like I noted above, this attempt to violate people's civil liberties for no reason has now cost you guys any chance at magazine restrictions.

 

Those are the same tools used for all other manufacturing. So now you want to outlaw civilization.

You are again wrong. Your proposal violates the Constitution.

So now you want to outlaw all bullets as well.

Needless to say, unconstitutional.

Nope. Your proposal would outlaw all bullets.

Fake news. Article is filled with lies.

It is a real argument. That you do not understand it does not change this.

Guns do not cause murders. Murderers cause murders.

No. The ignorance is all yours.

Yes it would.

Wrong. Your proposals violate the Constitution.

Wrong again. Your proposals violate the Heller ruling.

And wrong yet again. "Upholding the Constitution" is not legislation.

No confusion. You are merely wrong.

And wrong again. "Upholding the Constitution" is not legislation.

 

All of them. All you need to do is insert a 100 round magazine into the gun.

Not if you insert a 100 round magazine into it.

He also required a bump stock in order to do that.

People have the right to have hunting rifles whether you like it or not.

Nonsense. He merely would have reloaded more often.

 

So you provide opinion dressed up as fact. You are welcome to your opinion, of course. No problem there.

 

I have been told we can chop off WHATEVER you like and quote it Just as long as you don't add or change words from their original post

Soooooo, he chopped off the video and replied to it

BTW there is also a three ... rule too! Might want to do a search on that little alteration method

 

Are you saying that ALL auto loading firearms are assault weapons?

 

When have home invaders used Kevlar? Can you think of more than half a dozen times in US history? Also, it's pretty easy to aim for the head with a shotgun. Even if that were a concern, just use slugs. Even if the Kevlar manages to stop the slug, they aren't getting up for a while.

 

The AR platform, especially in its 8 and 10” barrels are the first and best choice for home defense.

 

You shouldn't respond to posts without reading them.

They definitely do not violate the Constitution. They don't even violate the Heller legislation.

I wonder why you bother. The rest of your post... your WHOLE post, in fact, has absolutely ZERO substance. Repeating that's-not-true again and again and no arguments, is waste of your and my time.

 

No. That semi-auto-only guns are not assault rifles is a fact.

That the size of the magazine that is inserted into the gun has no bearing on whether it is an assault rifle is another fact.

That short range guns like shotguns and handguns are not assault weapons is a fact as well.

 

It seems to happen now and then.

No.

If that is what you choose for your own defense, that is your right. But you do not get to choose for other people.

 

I've never said anything about choosing that right for other people. Please don't misrepresent my posts.

 

You shouldn't falsely accuse people of not reading posts just because they outclass you in the debate.

Wrong. Your proposals violate the Constitution.

Wrong again. Your proposals violate Heller.

Wrong yet again. Upholding the Constitution is not legislation.

I value truth and honesty.

Wrong again. I repeatedly pointed out countless untrue claims in your post.

That's why I included arguments.

 

Fair enough.

 

Causing damage or destruction to them

By causing injury or death.

 

You don't understand the difference between opinion and fact. Assault is just an adjective indicating that the product is appropriate for assault. As such it could apply to any gun. You are arguing about definitions. A fact would some to the effect that the gun weighs 14 lbs. That would be a fact. How it should be used is a matter of opinion. Hope that helps.

 

Yes I do. A fact is something that is true. And opinion is how someone feels about something.

That is incorrect. It is a specific name for a specific type of gun.

Guns that are not that specific type are not assault weapons.

 

Any gun is an assault weapon if it is used for assaulting a human being. No gun can be an assault weapon if used for target competition. A firearm is a device that uses expanding gas to push a projectile from a barrel. How it is used is another matter entirely. I have a semi auto Winchester 100 hunting rifle in .243 caliber. Nice gun. beautiful figured walnut stock. It can do more damage than an M2. It would be an assault rifle if it were used like an M2 is intended to be used.

 

That is incorrect. Assault weapon is a specific name for a specific kind of gun.

Guns that do not fit the definition are not assault weapons.

 

According to whom? I never heard the term assault weapon or assault rifle in the military. A rifle was just a rifle. A pistol was just a pistot. An M4 mortar was just a mortar. Who is it that has the responsibility to define the adjective? People with opinions?

 

So define away.