Assault weapons are for the Military only

[Anonymous]

Exactly. Those who use the term "assault weapons" don't know the proper terminology. They spout it off as if they know, but when push comes to shove, they point at anything that looks "Military-ish". Like all the people claiming the Bushmaster was illegal. It wasn't an illegal gun. I can buy one today.

And those talking about automatic machine guns are completely off their rockers since those were outlawed in the Reagan Administration. Only those that had them decades ago can own them. They are constantly under surveillance and transfer is heavily papered and monitored. To acquire one illegally is almost impossible because the U.S. knows where all the auto machine guns are. They are extremely rare.

[Anonymous]

Exactly. Those who use the term "assault weapons" don't know the proper terminology. They spout it off as if they know, but when push comes to shove, they point at anything that looks "Military-ish". Like all the people claiming the Bushmaster was illegal. It wasn't an illegal gun. I can buy one today.

And those talking about automatic machine guns are completely off their rockers since those were outlawed in the Reagan Administration. Only those that had them decades ago can own them. They are constantly under surveillance and transfer is heavily papered and monitored. To acquire one illegally is almost impossible because the U.S. knows where all the auto machine guns are. They are extremely rare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL if it were shaped differently it would be ok? The difference is auto / semi morons. I best the assault weapons ban people don't have a clue what the difference is and have ever shot one.

Oh, so sorry we got the gun terminolgy wrong. See, most of us on here don't spend our productive free time practicing how to kill people.

[Anonymous]

2nd amendment absolutists/strict-constructionists:

If gun control doesn't work, then why are these mass murders and normal murders in the US never use automatic weapons?

Extending treading semi-auto's as automatics would turn the market in a decade into the same issues automatics have. Extreme cost and rarity.

When writing the semi-auto ban law, do not allow for grandfathering, levy a massive tax stamp required for use, no transferability, felony for possession without such tax stamp.

The public should only be allowed revolvers (preferably fixed-cylinder), muzzle loaders, and as for rifles, muzzle-loaders, bolt-action, maybe lever and pump action as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. Those who use the term "assault weapons" don't know the proper terminology. They spout it off as if they know, but when push comes to shove, they point at anything that looks "Military-ish". Like all the people claiming the Bushmaster was illegal. It wasn't an illegal gun. I can buy one today.

And those talking about automatic machine guns are completely off their rockers since those were outlawed in the Reagan Administration. Only those that had them decades ago can own them. They are constantly under surveillance and transfer is heavily papered and monitored. To acquire one illegally is almost impossible because the U.S. knows where all the auto machine guns are. They are extremely rare.

those who know their guns such as me are not complaining the bushmaster was illegal.

It SHOULD be illegal.

Keep your remington r700 bolt action. Ban semi-auto rifles and have a mag/cylinder cap max of 10 on all guns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the "Bushmaster" used to pump 3-11 exploding bullets each into those 20 six year old children is a military weapon, and has no purpose outside of war. It's sale to the public is a violation of its ATF approval( hope lawyers are looking at this angle) .
quote]

Ammunition for sale in the US does not "explode". :-) Read the coroner's report, asshole

Oh, and the military is not allowed to act as a police or arme militia within the borders.

Nancy was sold a legal assault weapon which she did not maintain control of or access to. If anybody needs to be sued, it is her estate.

I don't know any preppers and I may think that they are a little eccentric, however, I am not sure that they are by definition 'crazy.'

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Sir or Ma'am. You are arguing from a point of ignorance an emotion. This is not your fault. You simply don't know what you don't know. It is never a good idea to argue from an emotional bias. Far batter to use emotion to hone your argument than be the basis for said argument. However, throwing colorful metaphors around when you are wrong, simply leads people to believe you are a rube.

Bullets fired out of rifles and handguns simply do not explode (Geneva convention). Grenades explode. But they are not fired from the barrels of handguns. The bullets which were tragically used in this event did not explode.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the "Bushmaster" used to pump 3-11 exploding bullets each into those 20 six year old children is a military weapon, and has no purpose outside of war. It's sale to the public is a violation of its ATF approval( hope lawyers are looking at this angle) .
quote]

Ammunition for sale in the US does not "explode". :-) Read the coroner's report, asshole

Oh, and the military is not allowed to act as a police or arme militia within the borders.

Nancy was sold a legal assault weapon which she did not maintain control of or access to. If anybody needs to be sued, it is her estate.

I don't know any preppers and I may think that they are a little eccentric, however, I am not sure that they are by definition 'crazy.'

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Sir or Ma'am. You are arguing from a point of ignorance an emotion. This is not your fault. You simply don't know what you don't know. It is never a good idea to argue from an emotional bias. Far batter to use emotion to hone your argument than be the basis for said argument. However, throwing colorful metaphors around when you are wrong, simply leads people to believe you are a rube.

Bullets fired out of rifles and handguns simply do not explode (Geneva convention). Grenades explode. But they are not fired from the barrels of handguns. The bullets which were tragically used in this event did not explode.

So she doesn't exactly know what Hollow points are. Thats not emotion, just technical. Hollow points are scary.

[Anonymous]

A lot of red herring arguments over terminology being made in this thread.

Who cares if the bullets "exploded" or "fragmented"?

We don't want them to be legal.

And great argument PP that if gun control doesn't work, how come these mass shootings have been semi-automatic, not automatic weapons?

People can't get their hands on the automatics because there are too many barriers to get them... whether legally (not possible) or illegally (can't steal them if there aren't any around to steal).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. Those who use the term "assault weapons" don't know the proper terminology. They spout it off as if they know, but when push comes to shove, they point at anything that looks "Military-ish". Like all the people claiming the Bushmaster was illegal. It wasn't an illegal gun. I can buy one today.

And those talking about automatic machine guns are completely off their rockers since those were outlawed in the Reagan Administration. Only those that had them decades ago can own them. They are constantly under surveillance and transfer is heavily papered and monitored. To acquire one illegally is almost impossible because the U.S. knows where all the auto machine guns are. They are extremely rare.

those who know their guns such as me are not complaining the bushmaster was illegal.

It SHOULD be illegal.

Keep your remington r700 bolt action. Ban semi-auto rifles and have a mag/cylinder cap max of 10 on all guns.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Despite the argument over terminology I agree with OP. Bushmaster and other similar weapons should be illegal (and I read that they were, but the law expired). We have no use for those.

It's about gun control, not banning guns. Most people who legally own guns don't go around shooting people. We need stricter regulations/backgrounds checks and banning rifles like the Bushmaster.

We also need to do something about how we treat the mentally ill in this country. That's the root of the issue, I think. Most mass shootings are from people who are mentally ill and haven't received the treatment they need (Sandy Hook, CO shooting, etc). It's very easy for a mentally ill person to fall through the cracks.

[Anonymous]

those who know their guns such as me are not complaining the bushmaster was illegal.
It SHOULD be illegal.
Keep your remington r700 bolt action. Ban semi-auto rifles and have a mag/cylinder cap max of 10 on all guns.

+1 There is NO reason to own a semi-automatic. NONE. You don't use it for hunting.

The gun industry isn't making money on serious collectors of antique or historical guns. They aren't even making the most money on hunters. They make the most money selling weapons to nutcase people with their militia's who fear the end of the weld, stock arsenals, etc and criminals in the US and Mexico. The nutcase crew thinks they are responsible but they are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Ammunition for sale in the US does not "explode". :-)

The PP you were responding to probably was referring to the "fragmenting" of the bullet inside the children's bodies. I'm not a gun person -- is this description accurate?

A February report by Guns and Ammo magazine noted a growing demand in recent years for AR-15-type rifles – and specifically those loaded with .223 caliber bullets – for use in home defense. The .223 caliber load is popular, the article says, because it has better fragmentation upon impact, meaning it will deal a lot of damage with less chance of accidentally continuing through the target and endangering whoever's in the background.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/newtown-massacre-bushmaster-223/story?id=18000884#.UNFK1EItVFI

exactly what I meant, hunters don't use these bullets becuase tehy damage the meat too much. These bullets are designed to kill humans in war. period. they are war weapons and have no place in a civil society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

those who know their guns such as me are not complaining the bushmaster was illegal.
It SHOULD be illegal.
Keep your remington r700 bolt action. Ban semi-auto rifles and have a mag/cylinder cap max of 10 on all guns.

+1 There is NO reason to own a semi-automatic. NONE. You don't use it for hunting.

The gun industry isn't making money on serious collectors of antique or historical guns. They aren't even making the most money on hunters. They make the most money selling weapons to nutcase people with their militia's who fear the end of the weld, stock arsenals, etc and criminals in the US and Mexico. The nutcase crew thinks they are responsible but they are not.

Exactly, which is why the bushamster manufacturer was issuing "man cards" to people who bought their military assault weapons for personal use. They are not only sellingthem to the mentally unstable, they are deliberately marketing to them. SERIOUSLY " man card" what kind of weak , pathetic man needs a miliatry assault weapon to allow him feel more like a man? That shoudl be a person's 1st clue that they need psychological help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the "Bushmaster" used to pump 3-11 exploding bullets each into those 20 six year old children is a military weapon, and has no purpose outside of war. It's sale to the public is a violation of its ATF approval( hope lawyers are looking at this angle) .
quote]

Ammunition for sale in the US does not "explode". :-) Read the coroner's report, asshole

Oh, and the military is not allowed to act as a police or arme militia within the borders.

Nancy was sold a legal assault weapon which she did not maintain control of or access to. If anybody needs to be sued, it is her estate.

I don't know any preppers and I may think that they are a little eccentric, however, I am not sure that they are by definition 'crazy.'

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

If you weren't so threatened by my points , you would not have responded. I will say it again: the weapon used by the Beltway sniper, in Aurora and to kill the 20 six year old children in Newton is a weapon of war, the ammo designed to fit it is specifically designed to cause mass hemorrhage, which is why hunters don't use this ammo to hunt ( it woud destroy the meat)

In war, this type of weapon and ammo allows our soldiers to kill at a cheaper cost per bullet. The NRA's position is that these war weapons should be avaiable to untrained and unsupervised civilans with no back ground checks.

All branches of our US military screen back grounds of applicants, put them through rigorous physical and mental training, then only allow them to fire weapons under strict supervision of the chain of command.

The NRA, in contrast, wants to continue to make it possible for civilians to buy these war weapons, and fire them in a civil society with NO SUPERVISION< NO BACK GROUND CHECK and NO TRAINING. THAT is what the NRA and Gun Owners of America want: as many sales of war weapons to untrained, unsupervised Amerocans as possible.

Why? One, they want the $$$$ from the sales. Two, many are promoting gun sales on these "prepper" websites because they are racists and feel very threatened by the fact that our current President has more melanin in hi skin than they do.




Sir or Ma'am. You are arguing from a point of ignorance an emotion. This is not your fault. You simply don't know what you don't know. It is never a good idea to argue from an emotional bias. Far batter to use emotion to hone your argument than be the basis for said argument. However, throwing colorful metaphors around when you are wrong, simply leads people to believe you are a rube.

Bullets fired out of rifles and handguns simply do not explode (Geneva convention). Grenades explode. But they are not fired from the barrels of handguns. The bullets which were tragically used in this event did not explode.

So she doesn't exactly know what Hollow points are. Thats not emotion, just technical. Hollow points are scary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. Those who use the term "assault weapons" don't know the proper terminology. They spout it off as if they know, but when push comes to shove, they point at anything that looks "Military-ish". Like all the people claiming the Bushmaster was illegal. It wasn't an illegal gun. I can buy one today.

And those talking about automatic machine guns are completely off their rockers since those were outlawed in the Reagan Administration. Only those that had them decades ago can own them. They are constantly under surveillance and transfer is heavily papered and monitored. To acquire one illegally is almost impossible because the U.S. knows where all the auto machine guns are. They are extremely rare.

And one day VERY SOON this will be true of semi-automatic weapons as well